WELCOME
PRAYER
SING WORD OF GOD
SILENCE
Acts 2.44
Milk
October 25th 2015
PRAYER
SONG 1
FAITH IS
Hebrews 11:1 –
Hebrews 11:1 “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
SONG 2
I AM WITH YOU ALWAYS
Matthew 28:18-20
Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
NOTES FOR SONGS
Alright, were at verse 41.
Peter has preached the Word to the men standing there on the Day of Pentecost. We don’t know all that was said but we know some of the content – presumably what we assume are the most important points since the Holy Spirit inspired Luke to write them in abstentia, and in retrospect from the insights of an apostles who was witness to all of this.
Let’s see if we can wrap the chapter up.
Verse 41
Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.
44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
Okay back to verse 41
41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
The word rendered gladly here in the King James means “freely, cheerfully, joyfully.” There is a super strong implication that those who received Peter’s words did so without any compulsion whatsoever.
We, being free, receive what is offered to us by God cheerfully and rejoicing in the privilege of becoming reconciled to Him through Jesus Christ or else the event would NOT be joyous, right?
It would be compulsory, and ultimately a burden. “To freely believe, and freely receive, we will freely conceive and then freely achieve.”
I prefer, due to scripture, to see this as being the means God converts and brings all souls to Him – not discounting His sovereignty but admitting that He is not despotic.
The little couplet:
“To freely believe, and freely receive, we freely conceive to freely achieve,” is a better reflection of God reaching and touching some rather than the idea of
“When we believe by force, we are like the horse, with no choice of course, so we just plod along. And without choice, and without voice, in this salvation, we are dead.”
Obviously, they who, as scripture says:
“gladly received his word” we alive and rejoicing, proving, at least to me, that they were open to the truths shared.
But we have to note how Luke puts this. He writes:
“Then they that gladly received his word.”
There’s an direct implication here that since there was a “they who gladly received Peter’s words,” that there was also a “they who did not.”
Now, this is perhaps one of the most – if not THE singles most potent and powerful spiritual event in all of Christian history.
I make this observation based on it being the fulfillment of ancient scriptural promises and prophesies, that the Holy Spirit falling was actually heard (as a rushing wind) that it was seen (as if tongues of fire) that it was backed by the miracle of spoken foreign tongues, and that the potency (for lack of a better word) of the Spirit made is seem as if those effected were drunk.
Also taking note of the fact that three THOUSAND souls “gladly received the Word of Peter” and were then baptized I think we can say this was one heck of a remarkable event Spiritually.
And yet . . . there were those who did NOT receive the Word of Peter joyously.
Apparently they did not receive it at all.
There are a lot of responses in the Christian community as to why some hear and receive the Word and others do not.
We’ve touched on one – the Calvinist view – which says that if someone does receive the Word it’s because they cannot resist God and if they don’t it’s because God has not called them – and never will and therefore they will never receive it because that’s His will.
From an opposing view – called the Arminianist – the thought is God calls but people choose to resist Him.
I accept an amalgamation of these two views. I first believe that God must first call before any human would ever seek Him. We are too self-centered and unless He ignited a general fire in all of us via conscience, the Spirit, nature or the cosmos we would as a whole face down in the dirt digging for grubs.
But I also believe that those who are His will respond NOT because He makes them but because they seek Him, desire Him, and want what He offers them.
I then believe that those who are not His and will therefore not receive His call, refuse it for a couple of reasons – which are all supported by scripture.
The first reason scripture says that there are those who will not receive the Word given them is because Satan snatches the Word they have been given away before it can take root in their hearts.
This is the reason Jesus gives in His parable of the Sower and why there are those, well before the Word has even had a chance to take root refuse the words delivered.
The second main reason that we find in scripture for why some do not receive the word joyously and freely when it is given is hard to hear – but its true.
In John 3:19 we read the following:
“And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.”
When we look through scripture to complete the line –
“God is . . . (blank) we get . . .
“God is not a man . . .” Numbers 23:19
“God is a consuming fire.” Deuteronomy 4:24
“God is one YHWY” Deuteronomy 6:4
“God is mighty”
“God is great”
“God is our refuge”
“God is One”
“God is True” (and the Apostle John gives us these)
“God is Love” and
“God is Light.”
When John wrote that “men loved darkness rather that light because their deeds were evil,” it describes the heart of someone who loves their evil ways and this evil world more than they love, want or seek Him – God – who is light – simple as that.
They find pleasure in the dark more than in the light. They find hope in the dark more than the light. They bask in the dark over the light and John adds that this is because . . . (ready)
“the light reveals them and that their deeds are evil.”
It is a VERY interesting study, the study of evil and those who love it.
We tend to think that those who love the dark more than the light as being heroin addicts and prostitutes etc. and to a certain extent this is true.
But they are not the most evil. The reality is the darkest form of darkness (in this world) often appears as a type of light.
Speaking of false apostles in 2nd Corinthians 11:13-15 Paul writes:
“For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.”
Jesus says something interesting (and at first glance something quite paradoxical in Matthew 6:23). He says:
“But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. (Listen) If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!”
In my estimation the first application and interpretation of the passage is a comparison.
“If your physical eye is diseased your whole body will be in darkness,” is what he could first mean, then the comparison,
“but if your inner eye transforms light to darkness how great is that darkness,” meaning, a diseased soul is in the greatest form of darkness possible. “
If, therefore (relative to the comparison) the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is THAT darkness!
It’s a light that never warms.
A light that never heals.
A light that obscures.
A light that never reveals God but only reveals this world.
In light of all of this I would suggest that while those trapped in darkness of the flesh certainly avoid and refuse invitations to the light, it is those who are full of the most dark light that want nothing to do with the light that does warm and reveal – the truth –
And in this world these are often those who appear brightest, most accomplished, successful and self-sufficient.
These typically “hate the light” because, again the Light exposes their evil (which they love and frankly worship).
So I think it is safe to say that those who actually love their dark light more than Him who is light will never be persuaded to embrace or receive the Word in this world.
For this reason I believe the greatest and most radical salvation stories occur in the lives who have been accomplished, educated, and steeped in the world.
All salvations are a miracle, but for those imprisoned by the flesh He is often a much more enticing solution that those who are imprisoned by success.
Quite frankly, and the longer I live, there is an utterly clear demarcation between people who are truly His and the rest of the World.
The line is defined by people who want and seek God at all costs and those who remain somewhere between lukewarm all the way down to apathetic or indifferent toward His existence.
Here at the day of Pentecost we have a gathering of devout men. But devotion to a religious cause does not necessarily equate to men being seekers of truth, men who love the light more than the dark, men who are willing to publicly sacrifice all to admit their faith in Him.
And so we have “some who received the Words of Peter” and “some who did not,” in spite of everything they had seen and heard.
And the ONLY reason I think we can give for their refusing to receive his words is . . . they must have (at that point in their lives) loved the darkness more than the light.”
Now, this event seems to have begun at nine in the morning. We don’t know how long Peter preached but from the wording of verse 41 it seems 3000 joined the ranks of publicly committed followers of Jesus on this same day.
If only the Apostles performed the water baptisms, then that would have each of them baptizing 250 people each.
If it was an assembly line they could have knocked it out in an hour – doing 4 per minute – but having done baptisms in mass this is a lot of work, not the easiest thing in the world, and would have been pretty perfunctory (meaning without any meaningful talk or joy going on in between the dunks) etc.
If they spent a minute with each person then it would have taken over four hours, and if others of the 120 participated they could have baptized the 3000 much more efficiently with each man doing twenty five – which is still a lot but seems more reasonable.
It is possible that the baptisms took place all over the area too and the total count, by the end of the say, was 3000.
Finally, there is also the possibility that the Apostles got the ball rolling and then let those who were baptized baptize others and if that was the case the work would have gotten done exponentially.
We don’t know. Scripture doesn’t say. All we know is that 3000 souls from all over – devout Jews – joined the apostles and the other 120 followers of Jesus at this time. (verse 42)
42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
This is a very interesting verse because “steadfastly” in the Greek means, “remaining at the side or not ever forsaking” the Apostles doctrine and not that they were constantly hearing the apostles actual doctrines taught to them.
Can we assume that none of those who received Peter’s words who were baptized apostasied?
I think we can. So even though, by this account they were rather quickly admitted into the fellowship of the Apostles, and were later subject to all sorts of persecution and trouble, it seems that they –
“continued steadfastly.”
And Peter adds, “in the apostles’ doctrine.”
While I would like to teach that this means they continued to hear the doctrines of the apostles but the construction of the words means that they never let go of what the apostles said.
In any case it says that they “continued steadfastly to adhere to what the apostles taught” (or “they continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine”) “and in fellowship.”
The word rendered fellowship is koinonia and it is translated in the King James in the words “communion,” “fellowship,” communicate” and even “distribution.”
It properly means “having things in common, or participation in, or society, and friendship.
When people gather together and share in communion today there are several elements characteristic of the Greek word “koinonia.”
There is the idea that all who are partaking of the elements “share in their faith in Jesus,” in their belief that He suffered, died and rose again. We share in the common belief in a heaven that awaits us, a distain for things of the flesh, etc.
We share in each others sufferings, and these things are shared from the heart of all who are participating in the communal event.
There is also the obvious sharing of the elements that are emblematic of His shed blood and broken flesh.
And then there is the tacit sharing of other things we have in common – suffering, love, concern for each other, etc. These things are all shared in through our unity of the faith, our friendships, our “commune”- “ity” we have with each other as followers of Christ.
Koinonia is therefore a perfect term for communion and friendship. Quite frankly the word means social intercourse. Communion and community of the Saints might be considered in some respect as spiritual intercourse (coitus) with all who believe.
Relative to our carnal state the term coitus is also derived from this word koinonia.
We are going to see in a minute that these first early Christians were so bound that they even held their material property (at least some of it) communally.
Now, I think it’s important to point some things out. When believers get together and really seek to experience koinonia in the body there is a threat that some or all will incorrectly interpret the unity and love from the Spirit with physical union.
I have long been a casual student of religious cults and almost all of them, where they start off well meaning and seeking to “really live” the authentic Christian life, wind up applying some form of physical koinonia as a means to fully experience “the fellowship” described here in Acts 2.
Most of the groups focused on “Cosmic powers from on high” go this route, (including the Raliens,) but a group called, “The Family,” Rasputin, Jim Jones, and of course Joseph Smith (plus hundreds more) have made this mistake.
I point this out to emphasize the fact that Christianity is spiritually understood and lived out from a spiritual base with applications to the physical world around us being subject to Apostolic directives.
Notice I do NOT say Biblical directives but Apostolic because if I said “biblical” then polygamy has a foot in the door.
Luke adds that they also “continued steadfastly . . in breaking of bread, and in prayers.”
All that being said this is a tight knit group of Christian love. We have tried here at CAMPUS to both retain the elements found here in this simple description of Acts that when we get together we too will
Continue steadfastly hearing the Apostles doctrines (study of the Word)
In fellowship (as far as people freely want to engage with one another)
“In breaking of bread”
and “in prayers.”
That is a pretty simple description of the earliest converts to Christ, eh?
We will read some other things they did in a minute but this is a really sound foundation in my estimation of doing church.
Admittedly some of it might be culturally based but if we were looking for a template on how to “do church” I personally think this is exceptional.
However when Luke adds “and in the breaking of bread,” we aren’t entirely sure what this means.
The Syriac mss of the NT renders this “the Eucharist,” or the “Lord’s Supper.”
It cannot, however, be determined whether this refers to their partaking of their ordinary food together, or to what they called “feasts of charity,” or to the Lord’s Supper.
It is interesting to read other Bible translation of this passage because some retain the basic uncertain meaning but others implement religious ritual into the interpretation. Let me give you three examples which all say the line differently:
(BBE) And they kept their attention fixed on the Apostles’ teaching and were united together in the taking of broken bread and in prayer.
In this case it seems emblematic of communion as it translates “in the breaking of bread” to taking “of broken bread.”
(DBY) And they persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers.
Here the line could better be understood to mean in eating meals. And finally,
The WNT really throws down saying:
“and they were constant in listening to the teaching of the Apostles and in their attendance at the Communion, that is, the Breaking of the Bread, and at prayer.
Having said all this, the most literal translations from the Greek to English maintain the line, “in breaking bread” without adding any emphasis.
A couple things about this (since we try and understand all angles of scripture).
When Jesus introduced communion Paul describes it this way in 1st Corinthians 11:24-26
“And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.”
Understanding this we can be certain that the believers in the early church had communion often if NOT every time they associated together.
There are churches that do this even today.
However, if the Lord returned within a generation as He said He would in Matthew 24, then the line
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come”
Makes communion unnecessary since 70 AD. That being said, it is a wonderful thing to experience – sort of like water baptism, and I am not against the ritual in the least.
However, in my estimation we need to very cautious. Physical rituals have a tremendous capacity to usurp something that God has plainly given all who believe on Him – His Spirit living IN us and His law written ON our hearts.
Hang with me.
To the Jewish converts to Jesus, the broken bread and the wine, which was once eaten communally at the Passover, was not to symbolize Jesus as the Passover lamb to them.
Jesus told them – those people – to break bread and drink wine now NOT in remembrance of the Passover but in rememberance of Him UNTIL he comes – For who – for them, those who converted from Judaism to Him.
Remember, the New Testament is a narrative describing first and foremost God fulfilling His promises to the House of Israel. And the House of Israel understood the eating and drinking in relation to their expansive history.
So Jesus tells them, keep doing this in remembrance of me UNTIL I COME.
But when we read in Hebrews the following:
Hebrews 10:16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, “I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them.”
We begin to see these things fading. Why? Because the Spirit within will overcome them.
In other words if we have the Spirit of God dwelling in us what need is there of physical reminders? He is with us all the time – by His Spirit – a far greater reminder than a material remembrance like consumed bread and wine.
Again, this instruction was to the Apostles and to those whom the apostles reached – the Jews. And it would be some years before all such things would fade.
But they were fading even then! So much so that the writer of Hebrews said in 8:13:
“In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”
What is the New Covenant? What God promised – that He would write His Laws upon us and give us His Spirit by the shed blood of Christ.
It’s a covenant of grace. Based on faith and the Commandment to love.
So what I am trying to gently point out is that material communion was purposeful to the believers in the early church as they were both waiting on Him and they were transitioning OUT of the former covenant of Passovers and material symbols.
But in the New Covenant, especially if you view that He came to them within a generation, the spiritual is everything as He has written His laws onto our hearts and minds.
We will have communion here at CAMPUS as often and as long as you (the Body of believers gathered here) desire it. (That’s when we do it by the way – when you all request it).
But in my estimation material communion is a formality – and can – CAN – serve to replace matter of the Spirit as CAN water baptisms, Jesus concerts, and other such things, forgetting that what matters to God is what is on the heart.
Now, if the breaking of bread was NOT communion here but was instead just eating (which a number of scholars suggest) the bread of the Hebrews was made commonly into cakes which were thin, hard, and brittle so that it was broken instead of being cut.
And with eating together a sign of harmony and love among a people and I think it is a tremendous blessing when it occurs in a group setting.
Luke adds, “and in prayers.”
Done by Jesus always, commanded by Jesus, done by the Apostles, done by the early church – and done by believers ever since.
Again, formality of prayer CAN occur when it really ought to be from the heart and unrestrained.
(Verse 43)
43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.
The word fear in this case is translated “reverence or awe” presumably tied to the wonders and signs that were done by the apostles.
Jesus told them that they would actually do greater works than He (probably meaning in the sense of depth) and that signs and wonders would follow them.
As we study through Acts we will read of them, beginning in the next chapter.
And then chapter 44
44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
Let’s just cover the first line here before we wrap it up for today, “And all that believed were together.”
I know I have really gotten liberal in my views in these past years but I think it would be wonderful if “ALL THAT BELIEVED” were together.
Believed what?
Well, what did “all” these devout men believe?
They believed that Jesus was the Messiah. They believed that He was sent by God. They believed that He was crucified. They believed that He rose from the dead. And they believed it was important to place their faith, even their very salvation on Him.
I wish that everyone who believed these things – no matter how they believed on anything else – would be together.
I wish we would all calm ourselves down on judging each other and being snide about what this person thinks or that person does or what church we all attend and I wish that we could simply unite on the single person of Jesus.
That those who believe on Him – who openly claim to believe on Him were treated with love and acceptance so that if they believe other things – other errant things – love will bring them to the truth.
I doubt very much that many of these devout converts had a perfect understanding of the living God.
I doubt any of them knew perfectly how to worship God in Spirit and truth.
I bet that there were a number of different views about this doctrine or that.
But three 3,120 men, touched by the Holy Spirit were bound by one common belief – Jesus is Lord.
Let’s stop here.
Questions / Comments?
