“Day by day”
(Act 2:46 ESV) 46 And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts,
“Day by day” indicates a continuous practice. Many translations” say daily.”
The modern practice of weekly gatherings has little in the way of New Testament support. The apostles taught daily house to house (Acts 5:42). They seem to have had daily baptisms (Acts 16:5). The Bereans studied the scriptures daily (Acts 17:11), which would have require a daily trip to the local synagogue or to the home of a member with a copy of the Old Testament scrolls. We are called to exhort one another daily (Heb 3:13).
The early church grew in a culture radically different from our own, and it would be a mistake to treat this as some sort of law. But our community should be about much more than a weekly gathering and a “hello” in the foyer.
How we strive to accomplish that will vary from place to place, but we must work hard to create true community, not merely an event to attend.
“Attending the temple together.”
The New American Standard translates —
(Act 2:46 NAS) And day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart,
The early Christians did not reject their Jewish roots entirely. They continued in the Temple. Now, the Temple was not exactly the Jewish form of our church service. To the Jews, “worship” meant sacrifice in the Temple, not singing or hearing sermons. Therefore, the likely went to the Temple not because Jewish law required it but because it was a place of prayer, a space large enough for thousands to meet, a great place to preach the gospel to others, and a place of profound eschatological significance.
It seems that the church thus met both in homes and in the Temple — in the homes for meals and in the Temple for fellowship with the entire congregation. Certainly, the Temple would have been a great place for instructing the entire membership, as it would have been hard to find enough teachers to go to over 100 homes early on.
Thus, Luke paints a picture of a community in right relationship with one another and with God, submissive to their leaders, and encouraging and supporting each other both spiritually and, as needed, financially. This is the Kingdom as well realized as it will be before Jesus returns.
The “pattern” therefore isn’t five acts of worship. The pattern is found in joined hearts, common meals, and mutual support.
The Temple and the Pattern
We can’t ignore the fact that the church met in the Jewish temple, where instruments were played by the Levites and a Levitical choir sang praises to God. Many of the Psalms were written to be part of the Temple service.
And yet the early Christians didn’t feel obliged to flee these things. Rather, they chose to meet in the very heart of Judaism. Indeed, they thought of themselves as Jews who believed in the Messiah. What better place to celebrate the coming of the Kingdom than in God’s holy Temple?
Indeed, we later read that the apostles, following Jewish custom, went to the Temple to pray (Acts 3:1). The Christians worshiped God in the Temple even though it was filled with instrumental and choir music, animal sacrifice, and other marks of the Jewish religion. They didn’t so much see Judaism as repealed as fulfilled, and so long as God allowed the Temple to stand, they worshiped God there.
It took time for the church to sort out how the coming of the Kingdom changes Judaism. In fact, that sorting out process is a major theme of Acts as well as several of Paul’s epistles. It was not an easy transition, but ultimately God made it plain.
It was not the church and Pentecost that ended Temple worship but God via the Roman army. God’s judgment finally came and the Temple sacrifices became entire impossible.
Therefore, we do well to remember that the early Christians were largely Jews, and that the New Testament is written largely by Jews against a Jewish culture. And this simple observation will often dramatically change how we read the text.
“Praising God”
(Act 2:47 ESV) praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.
To “praise God” can certainly mean in song, but it’s not necessarily the case. In fact, the other place where Luke uses the identical phrase is —
(Luk 2:20 ESV) And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.
Indeed, if you trace all the uses of “praising” in Luke-Acts, you’ll find that most plainly are not referring to song and none are necessarily referring to song. That’s not to say that I don’t think the early church sang, just that this verse cannot be forced into service to support a patternistic model of singing as one “act of worship.”
But did they sing? Of course, they sang. They were First Century Jews who’d experienced the coming of the Kingdom and the outpouring of the Spirit. How could they not?
(Jer 31:12 ESV) They shall come and sing aloud on the height of Zion, and they shall be radiant over the goodness of the LORD, over the grain, the wine, and the oil, and over the young of the flock and the herd; their life shall be like a watered garden, and they shall languish no more.
“Having favor with all the people.”
Luke will soon report on the persecutions suffered by the early church at the hands of the Jewish authorities. But among the ordinary people, the Christians were highly regarded. After all, such generosity and such love must have been very attractive.
Sadly, this is no longer the image of Christianity. We no longer have the favor the people. And the problem isn’t the media or liberal judges. The problem is us.
If we were to live as the early church lived, if we were to share with each other as they did, if we were to love each other as they did, we’d have a very different image because we’d be very different people.
“The Lord added …”
And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.
In the Churches of Christ, we read this as God adding the saved to the listing of all saved people. We see it as accounting — and so use this text to oppose the Baptist practice of voting on who is to be accepted into the church.
The real point, I think, is that God added them into the fellowship and community of the church. They weren’t just saved to go home but to join the vibrant, living community of faith — and God caused this to happen.
Indeed, the clear point is that, even though the community must choose whom to accept, it’s ultimately God’s call, and a convert’s faith is ample reason to accept him. There is no basis to reject those are saved. That is, if God accepts someone, so must we.
Jay,
You said, “The “pattern” therefore isn’t five acts of worship. The pattern is found in joined hearts, common meals, and mutual support.”
and finally,
“Indeed, the clear point is that, even though the community must choose whom to accept, it’s ultimately God’s call, and a convert’s faith is ample reason to accept him. There is no basis to reject those are saved. That is, if God accepts someone, so must we.”
And I say, Amen.
I just wrote to a friend before coming here. I was sharing a recipe that I enjoyed last evening. What I wrote was, “there are three things that I love most; God, people and food; when I can get all three together, I am in heaven on earth”.
Jay…It’s odd that the patternists don’t teach what you just indicated was the normal pattern… Why ? If the pattern is so important and at the same time so obvious…why do they pick and choose and not just go ahead and do the pattern ?? I don’t get that…
“God added to their number (the church) those who were being saved”… It seems that the text here suggests that being added to the church is a separate action from being saved…Is that accurate..?? Does the text bear that out ?
Price,
Perhaps the “adding” was the bringing of the new converts into the fellowship of the body. Unfortunately, many times today this does not happen. I’ve seen many people who were baptized on a confession of faith who never become a part of the fellowship of Christians. Sometimes, this is because of our desire to get people into the water more than to get them into Christ – i.e., into his body, the fellowship of believers.
Jerry… I was thinking the same thing… I even considered Peter’s account of Cornelius’ conversion… He said that since God had given him and his family the same gifts that He had given the them at the beginning that he came to the conclusion that “who was he to resist God?”…. Acts 11:17.. Well, since Cornelius appears to have “been saved”…(the angel said he was to listen to Peter and hear a message by which he would be saved)…as evidenced by the Holy Spirit… Peter then in fact does NOT resist God and Baptizes Cornelius and his household… Why would somebody baptize someone that had already been saved as saved could be ? I’m sure Peter considered himself saved although there is no record of his baptism which SURELY there might be if his salvation depended on it… So, Peter SURELY would have considered Cornelius as saved as he was… At least in my opinion… So why the baptism… I believe you correctly stated the answer…to admit him into the fellowship of the church… God had already admitted him into the Kingdom…
Jay noted: “How we strive to accomplish that will vary from place to place, but we must work hard to create true community, not merely an event to attend.”
>>>
Indeed. But after much consideration, it is my view that “church” will continue to be predominantly an “event” as long as one practice is immutable. In other words, whatever we have that we cannot or will not set aside –even for a couple of weeks– is going to continue to be our focus. It’s unavoidable. The Sunday morning service is the raison d’etre for almost every congregation.
Shall we deny this? Before we say, “Not us!”, consider the following: If YOUR congregation were to fall upon very hard times in terms of attendance and offerings, you would be forced to lay down certain things that you previously did. Perhaps you would have to give up youth activities, or benevolence, or paid staff, or even a dedicated “church building”. But what one thing, if you stopped doing it, would cause your fellow believers to say, “That congregation has ‘gone under'”?
All together now.. the answer is “holding Sunday services”.
As long as this is the reality, congregational life and identity will continue to center on a weekly event, no matter how much we insist that it is not so. The church will only break its orbit around Sunday services when it becomes free to set aside that practice. Can we do this? I don’t know; I have my doubts. When I talk to a person who insists on getting a little tipsy every day of his life and he tells me, “I can stop drinking anytime I want to,” I am dubious.
Please understand, I am not saying that a weekly meeting is a bad thing to do, or wrong in and of itself. Not at all. But there is an old saying that an idol is anything you cannot do without which is less than God.
?
what does relationship mean…..
wait .wait . I know
see you next Sunday:
boy oh boy! what a perversion
of the word fellowship, and love
I have no right to nit-pick, but what Price writes is wrong. He is not understanding what the text says. He wrote: January 21, 2012 at 10:51 am
Jerry… I was thinking the same thing… I even considered Peter’s account of Cornelius’ conversion… He said that since God had given him and his family the same gifts that He had given the them at the beginning that he came to the conclusion that “who was he to resist God?”…. Acts 11:17.. Well, since Cornelius appears to have “been saved”…(the angel said he was to listen to Peter and hear a message by which he would be saved)…as evidenced by the Holy Spirit… Peter then in fact does NOT resist God and Baptizes Cornelius and his household… Why would somebody baptize someone that had already been saved as saved could be ? I’m sure Peter considered himself saved although there is no record of his baptism which SURELY there might be if his salvation depended on it… So, Peter SURELY would have considered Cornelius as saved as he was… At least in my opinion… So why the baptism… I believe you correctly stated the answer…to admit him into the fellowship of the church… God had already admitted him into the Kingdom…
————————————–
Cornelius did not receive the same gifts as the apostles or the 3,000 did as reported in Acts 2. What he did receive caused Peter to be confident that now Gentiles could be saved by being baptized into Christ. The message the angel told Cornelius he would hear and by which he would be saved was not the baptism in the Spirit which was given to convince Peter that indeed it WAS God’s will that Gentiles should be added to the kingdom. Peter then ordered the repentant sinners to be baptized in order to receive the remission of their sin and to receive the INDWELLING Spirit. Simple facts. Not at all what Price describes from his imagination. God’s angel told Cornelius that he would hear a MESSAGE by which he would be saved. The message was that salvation was in Christ through repentance and baptism (being born again of water and spirit).
Well said, Price. Right on! Thank you.
Almost anything, even something considered good, can become an idol when what is being done is disconnected from its original source, God or Jesus.
The Israelites complained until God allowed serpents in the wilderness to bite the people and they died. In His mercy, He provided by Moses a bronze serpent which was held up, and if a person looked at the serpent, they would not die, even after having been bitten. Numbers 21:9
Years passed and the bronze serpent still physically remained but what it represented had been forgotten. The serpent began to be used as a graven image representing a god other than Yahweh (or in addition to), and Israel burned incense and made worship to it. Hezekiah reinstated the worship of Yahweh and have the bronze serpent destroyed. What was a mechanism of delivery from death became the object of worship in place of the person of the Deliverer. Idolatry. 2 Kings 18:4
Maybe the Israelites met every Saturday as a group to burn incense to the serpent. Is it possible that people can meet on Sunday after Sunday and glorify the form of what they do, using the correct terminology and a high decibel level of sound to “do the acts of worship,” more than glorifying God?
The answer could be “yes,” — if people think they “check one off” every Sunday, if people meet physically together on Sunday and then go out and do/say things that divide the body, if people wear their “holy” mask on Sunday and the “worldly” mask Mon-Sat, if people think what they do on Sunday and how they do it places them above other Christians, and many other “if’s.”
But folks take care of that one with John 4:24, “in spirit and in truth,” interpreted as “do it right” and “think about it correctly while you do it.” Now those folks have elevated their interpretation as an idol. When people’s interpretations are elevated such that they or their opinions are glorified at the expense of unity in the body of Christ (by which Jesus is glorified, John 17), these people have essentially placed the bronze serpent on a pole as an idol in place of Jesus.
Does that sound like some scripture passages? How about Romans 1:23? Or maybe 1 Cor 10:9?
1 Cor 10:12 – the risk of self-assuredness.
Ray
You are performing eisegesis, brother. You have to be released from imposing your interpretive preconceptions upon these passages before you can see the message that is clearly there. What Price said is supported by scripture, but what you said is not. The more firmly entrenched someone is in their view, the harder God has to hit them to get their attention. I pray that God can use only a Popsicle stick on you instead of the 4×4 He had to use on me. Repeating something over and over doesn’t make it right; it just digs the trench a little deeper. “Pray more and repeat less” was helpful for me.
You don’t have to be a Greek scholar to be saved, but looking up a word or two might be helpful, because you will answer for what you teach others. That’s a different level of responsibility.
“Cornelius did not receive the same gifts as the apostles or the 3,000 did as reported in Acts 2.”
>>
Spoken as if it were actually a fact. Such “proof by assertion” is a common logical fallacy.
Royce…Thank you for reminding me of Peter’s remarks to the Apostles and Church leadership in Jerusalem concerning the conversion of the Gentiles. This is now Twice that Peter has had to explain to men who were Filled with the Holy Spirit as he was that God’s grace accepted by belief was sufficient to receive the Holy Spirit as they all had on the day of Pentecost and that he was eye witness to it… It reminded me that even spirit filled men of faith, yea verily even Apostles, can struggle with understanding the sufficiency of Grace. But, the Holy Spirit writing through the pen of Luke records it for future generations not once but twice so that perhaps we can grasp the enormity of grace.
I was also reminded by reading this passage and the Acts 11 passage that the leadership in Jerusalem was committed in no small way to the unity of believers. Perhaps the arguments and division some have created by insisting on who is saved from the time of belief until they rise from the water isn’t as consistent with that same call to unity. Perhaps there is another lesson here that some have missed or perhaps ignored entirely.
WOW! I have not replied on here in YEARS! lol….I wasn’t even sure if this website would still be up or not……I’m glad it is!
Excellent article! Jay, brother, you said…..
“The modern practice of weekly gatherings has little in the way of New Testament support. The apostles taught daily house to house (Acts 5:42). They seem to have had daily baptisms (Acts 16:5). The Bereans studied the scriptures daily (Acts 17:11), which would have require a daily trip to the local synagogue or to the home of a member with a copy of the Old Testament scrolls. We are called to exhort one another daily (Heb 3:13).
The early church grew in a culture radically different from our own, and it would be a mistake to treat this as some sort of law. But our community should be about much more than a weekly gathering and a “hello” in the foyer.
How we strive to accomplish that will vary from place to place, but we must work hard to create true community, not merely an event to attend.”
AMEN! cannot be said enough. I cannot stand to see people I love in church one time a week. I try to make every effort I can to try and meet with, hang out with these dear people, my brothers and sisters, my family, “outside of church.” My translation of your key passage, Jay, is simply this…..the first Christians hung out with each other and shared in this new Christ life every day, not just on Sunday. Fellowship is at the core of our faith. Unfortunately, this view of fellowship and “gathering together” and “Assembly” has not been widely held, until now, anyway but has been seen as obligation and a checklist of five things to get signed off for. And let’s be honest, in some churches, as far as hanging out “outside of church” there are still a lot of places where the less they know about you, the better!
The nail was hit square on the head about having favor with all of the people. There’s this lie among many Christians today that the more people who hate us, the smaller our circle is, the more right it means we are with God! That kind of thinking is the essence of self-righeousness. In reality, we are supposed to be in favor and good standing with people. In fact, if there’s anyone we’ll find ourselves in opposition with, it’s religious people, and it’s not because of us, but because of the intolerance and hatred that religion [I’m using the word religion as most people today use it] promotes. You want to make religious people angry enough to kill, tolerate and love!
Again, loved your comments on God adding to the church. We have been so religious about this verse. Using it to futher our “us vs. them” mindset that motivates most of everything we do. Hey, the Church of Christ archenemy is equally religious and Pharisaical with their traditional votes on who’s “in” and who “isn’t” who was “sincere” and who “wasn’t.” God adding to the ekklesia, the people of God is a new kind of life in community, not a point of argument, not a religious vote of membership into a club. That passage is a reminder to me that God saves, and God holds us together and God brings people into this amazing way of life! The life, the Way of Jesus!
Great to be back….I will do better to begin frequenting this website again and commenting more.