THEY DEVOTED themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. 44All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. 46Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.
Original Meaning
THE DESCRIPTION OF the events on the day of Pentecost ended with the spectacular statement that three thousand people were “added to their number” (2:41)—the result of the first evangelistic message of what may be called the era of the Spirit. Verses 42–47 describe the community life of the young church. We are first told that “they [presumably the new converts] devoted themselves” to what the church provided for their follow-through care (v. 42). Next is a description of the miraculous ministry of the apostles (v. 43), followed by a more general description of the community life of the whole church (“all the believers,” vv. 43–47).
Follow-Through Care of the Converts (2:42)
THERE WAS IMMEDIATE, regular follow-through1 care of the first converts in the early church. The verbal expression “they were devoting themselves to” (lit. trans.) covers four activities. “Devoting” (proskartereo) is the same word as is used in connection with the persistent devotion of the disciples to prayer in 1:14 (translated “constantly” there). This word occurs six times in Acts.2 “The meaning is that they continued in faithful adherence to the newly formed community.”3 The word is used often with the idea of “persisting obstinately in” something—a meaning that is appropriate here.4
(1) The first feature is “the apostles’ teaching.”Considering that Jesus spent so much time teaching the crowds and his inner band of followers, it is not surprising that teaching had an important place in the early church. Jesus himself instructed his disciples to teach obedience to those who had been baptized (Matt. 28:20). What is surprising is that, while Luke’s Gospel contains many descriptions of the content of Jesus’ teaching, nowhere in Acts are we given a clear description of what was taught to the new believers. From the Gospels and Acts we can say that it likely included explanations of the nature of salvation, the person and work of Christ, the commands of Christ and other features of the Christian life, and the message of the kingdom.5
(2) The word koinonia, which Luke uses for “fellowship,” is a favorite word of Paul’s, though this is the only time it appears in Luke’s writings.6 Its basic idea is sharing, but it is used also to denote intimacy and fellowship in general. It is used for “the fellowship of the Holy Spirit” (2 Cor. 13:14) and also for our participation in the blood and body of Christ when we partake of the cup and the bread at the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 10:16). Paul speaks of the pillars of the Jerusalem church giving him and Barnabas “the right hand of fellowship” (Gal. 2:9) as a sign of their accepting them as legitimate servants of Christ. In secular Greek the word was used for the sharing of possessions (cf. 2 Cor. 9:13). We should be cautious about using different occurrences of any word in the Bible to arrive at a general meaning of it, as words take different meanings according to the context in which they appear. But the nineteen occurrences of koinonia in the New Testament suggest that the church used this word for the unique sharing that Christians have with God and with other Christians.
(3) “The breaking of bread” has a definite article before bread, causing some to render it “the breaking of the loaf” (see also Luke 24:35) and to distinguish it from “the breaking of bread” (without the definite article) in verse 46 (see also 20:7, 11; 27:35; 1 Cor. 10:16; 11:23–24). They claim that verse 42 refers to the Lord’s Supper while verse 46 refers to ordinary meals.7 But this difference may not be so significant. This phrase “was a technical expression for the Jewish custom of pronouncing the blessing and breaking and distributing the bread at the beginning of a meal.”8 Others maintain that this phrase in Acts refers to the daily fellowship meals, which were separate from the continuation of the Last Supper (which, they claim, was first observed only annually at Passover time). These meals are said to have developed into the Agape (or love feast) and only later were they incorporated with the Last Supper to become the Lord’s Supper (see 1 Cor. 11:20–21).9
We prefer the view of scholars like Bruce, Murray Harris, Polhill, and Marshall, that the phrase “breaking of bread” in Acts refers to the Lord’s Supper, which was probably part of the ordinary fellowship meals as described in 1 Corinthians 11. As Paul’s traveling companion, Luke would have been aware of this practice in the churches of celebrating the Lord’s Supper and having fellowship meals together. It would have been confusing to his readers if he mentioned the breaking of bread without meaning the Lord’s Supper.
Bruce, quoting Rudolph Otto,10 has argued that it is the symbolism of broken bread in connection with the breaking of Christ’s body in death that makes this action significant. This is why there are at least twelve references to the breaking of bread in the New Testament.11 Note also that the other three features mentioned in 2:42—teaching, fellowship, and prayer—are spiritual activities, which suggests that this fourth one—the breaking of bread—is also a spiritual activity (i.e., the Lord’s Supper).
(4) The final feature in verse 42 literally reads, “and to the prayers” (see NRSV). The phrase could refer to prayer during the set times of the Jerusalem temple, which the disciples attended (3:1; cf. 2:46; 22:17). But there were also times when they prayed on their own (1:24; 4:24; 12:12). The prayer life of the early church was founded on the teaching about prayer in the Old Testament as practiced by the Jews of the time. Did the early Christians use the Lord’s Prayer during these times? We cannot be sure. We do know that by the second century they were using it. In fact, the manual of church life called the Didache12 recommended the use of the Lord’s Prayer three times a day.13
The great contribution of Jesus to the Christian understanding of prayer was his intimacy with God, whom he called “Father” (Mark 14:36). He taught his disciples also to share this intimacy, and even the Gentile Christians used the characteristic Aramaic word that he used, “Abba,” when addressing God (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). This new understanding of intimacy with God would have been actualized in their experience through the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. The fourth-century Bible expositor John Chrysostom defined prayer as “conversation with God.”14
The Community Life of the Church (2:43–47)
THE DESCRIPTION OF follow-through care of the new converts gives way to a description of the community life of the whole church. This is the first of at least eight summaries found in Acts that describe that life and say how it led to the growth of the word of God or of the church.15
First we are told about the “awe” that everyone was filled with and about the ministry of miracles performed by the apostles (v. 43). “Everyone” here could refer both to the believers and to outsiders who saw and heard what was happening in the church. These people could sense that God was at work. The miracles could also be signs to the Jews that the new age they were looking for was dawning. In the book of Acts such signs are closely connected to the evangelistic ministry of the church.16
The practice of sharing possessions in the early church (2:44–45) will be discussed in more detail in our study of 4:32–35. Property was sold according to need; the imperfect tense in the verbs here suggests this very thing. Thus, we do not have here a case of enforced sharing, as in communism. Nor was it a once-for-all disposal of all private property in the church. The important point is that the fellowship touched the pocketbook too!
Next we are told that the early believers went to the temple (v. 46a), just as Jesus did. They tried to remain within the Jewish fold; that attitude to Judaism prevailed among Christians in Judea throughout the New Testament era (see 21:26). Paul generally first went to the Jewish synagogue when his mission took him to a Gentile city. Stephen, however, attempted to show that the temple was no longer necessary (ch. 7). Soon the church was to declare that it was not necessary for a Gentile convert to become a Jew (ch. 15).
According to what we argued above, the breaking of bread mentioned in verse 46 included both the Lord’s Supper and fellowship meals. That there were such meals in the first church is confirmed by the statement, “they . . . ate together with glad and sincere hearts.” House fellowships were common in the early church; later they developed into “house churches.” In Corinth there seem to have been times when the whole church met “probably . . . in the large house of one of the wealthy Christians in the city.”17 At this time unbelievers were also present (1 Cor. 14:23). But there were also smaller churches that met, for example, in the house of Aquila and Prisca (1 Cor. 16:19).18
Eating together “with glad . . . hearts” can be an important expression of fellowship in any culture, and in the early church it had an important place (v. 46b). The believers also had “sincere hearts” when they met. The word translated “sincere” can mean single-minded devotion, the absence of pretense, or simplicity and generosity. Bruce thinks the context favors generosity.19 While it is difficult to decide on the exact meaning here, we can confidently say that it signifies an openhearted attitude, where there is no pretense and performance in the way the believers behaved. The joy came from the heart, because people were not trying to impress anyone. They had developed an attitude toward each other that enabled them to truly enjoy each other.
When God’s people come together and enjoy fellowship,“praising God” is the natural result (v. 47a). True fellowship focuses on God and helps people to remember the good things he has done, which, in turn, causes praise. Such fresh and powerful community life would win the admiration of people outside the church. And this is what happened in Jerusalem too, for the early Christians enjoyed “the favor of all the people” during their first few weeks (v. 47a).
In the meantime the church grew numerically20 (v. 47b). Luke never writes that these new conversions took place primarily through the preaching of the apostles. The favor that all the believers had among the people would have given opportunity for them to give the reason for the obvious transformation evident in their lives. Personal witness through word and life added to the impact of the miraculous signs and the public preaching and resulted in a comprehensive evangelistic outreach.
But it was “the Lord” who “added to their number.” Ultimately, God is the evangelist.21 Paul wrote, “I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow” (1 Cor. 3:6–7). God does use our efforts and our techniques, but we must ensure that we are in the place where he can use us and that our techniques are acceptable to him. As more people “were being saved,” they were added to the Christian community.22
Bridging Contexts
COMPLETENESS IN COMMUNITY life. This passage gives us a picture of early Christian community life. Each of the things the new Christians practiced are given often in the Scriptures, especially in the New Testament letters, as essential aspects of the Christian living. For this reason we will use this passage to teach us about effective community life. The first thing that we see is the completeness of their community life. There was care of the new believers (v. 42), the various elements of worship (vv. 42, 47), evangelistic outreach (vv. 43, 47), caring for the material needs of each other (v. 45), oneness in spirit (v. 44), and joyful informal fellowship in homes (v. 46). Would that we too might have such comprehensiveness in our community life!
Immediate follow-through care. The immediate involvement of new believers in regular follow-through care (v. 42) reminds us of the importance of making plans for this when organizing an evangelistic program. Follow-through care is implied in the Great Commission, which, in Matthew, includes baptism and teaching (Matt. 28:19). We do not know whether the early church had made plans for follow-through care before the day of Pentecost. But they knew they had to do it, and the way they got down to it is an admirable example to us.
Christianity is community living. The follow-through care was done within the context of “the fellowship” (v. 42). In addition to being devoted to the Lord, fellowship is something Christians are devoted to (v. 42), even though it has a lower level of authority over their lives. From what follows (v. 46) we can assume that the early believers met in different homes for the equivalent of what we call “growth groups,” “cell groups,” or “discipleship groups.”
I still remember my surprise when, as a young volunteer in YFC, I read in the first “follow-up guide” we used that the most important thing in the first few days after conversion is fellowship with other believers. As a lover of the Bible and a firm believer in its primacy for faith and practice, I felt that the Bible should have been mentioned here rather than fellowship. But soon I learned that new believers usually get to learn the importance of the Bible through the fellowship. The Bible is a strange book to many new believers. When they see others who have reached out to them in love studying the Bible, teaching it, quoting it, applying it, and describing its importance for life, they realize that they themselves need to get down to a study of the Scriptures. In the fellowship they will also get a feel for how the Bible is studied. Soon they themselves become people who “correctly handle . . . the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15).
According to the Bible the entire Christian life, including spiritual growth, battling sin and Satan, and serving God, are intended to be done in community. The passages in Ephesians, for example, that describe these things are all in the plural, suggesting that we do them along with others. Unfortunately, we may miss that emphasis because the plural “you” that appears in Greek in Ephesians and elsewhere is not immediately evident in English Bibles. One key aspect of fellowship that helps us grow in the faith is spiritual accountability (implied in v. 44 but clearer in 4:32–5:11). Hebrews 10:24 describes such accountability: “Let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds.”
Nowhere is it stated that Christians should continue to meet daily as they did in the first days of the Jerusalem church (v. 46). Considering the responsibilities one has in family life and in witness and vocation in society, it may not be a good idea for Christians to have a program in church every day of the week. History has shown that usually at the start of a revival there are daily meetings. After that it tapers off into a less frequent but regular pattern. Certainly it is helpful for new believers to be with Christians daily until they are more stable in their faith.
Community life is an integral part of the basic Christian life because Christianity is by nature a community religion. Paul says, “In Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others” (Rom. 12:5). So we get together not only because it is helpful, but also because we are a vital part of the body of Christ. In the preface to one of his earliest collections of hymns that he compiled for the Methodists, John Wesley wrote, “The Gospel of Christ knows no religion but social; no holiness but social holiness.”23 The body of Christ is incomplete without us, and we are incomplete without the body of Christ. Community life is not an option for a Christian, but a basic aspect of Christianity.
Teaching. The first activity of follow-through care mentioned is “the apostles’ teaching” (v. 42). Teaching was so important to the life of the church that when Paul gave Timothy a list of qualifications for elders, the only ability-related qualification mentioned was the ability to teach (1 Tim. 3:2). All the other qualifications had to do with the behavior, character, and reputation of the person.
The “apostles’ teaching” would have been particularly important in the early church because of their special relationship to Christ and his promise to them that the Holy Spirit “will guide [them] into all truth . . . and . . . will tell [them] what is yet to come” (John 16:13). With time the church developed a comprehensive body of teaching, so that Paul told the Ephesian elders that he had given them “the whole will and purpose of God” (20:27).24 At the end of his life he urged Timothy, “What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you” (2 Tim. 1:13–14). Later the church came to recognize that certain books with connections to the apostles best represented that “good deposit,” and the canon of the New Testament came into being. The New Testament along with the Old Testament has become the basis for our teaching today. A key, then, for follow-through care today is to teach people the Bible.
The Lord’s Supper as a means of follow-through care. The Lord’s Supper is also mentioned among the basic things done with and for the new believers (v. 42). Most Christian traditions have come to understand the Lord’s Supper as a means of edification for believers, though there are differences among churches about the details and extent of its value. Paul said that this meal is a proclamation of that which lies at the heart of the Christian gospel, the death of Christ (1 Cor. 11:26).
Does this suggest, then, that the Lord’s Supper would be helpful in confirming new believers in the faith and helping them grow in grace? This is a provocative question, for new believers are often prevented from participating in the Lord’s Supper until they are baptized and/or confirmed, which may take place several months after conversion. Should we then permit new Christians to participate in the Lord’s Supper before baptism and/or confirmation in churches where these take place some time after conversion? This is difficult to determine from this passage alone since the believers were baptized soon after they repented and believed. But it seems clear that, according to the Bible, we are incorporated into the body of Christ when we exercise saving faith (see Eph. 2), and that the Lord’s Supper is a characteristic activity of those belonging to the body of Christ (1 Cor. 10:17).
Prayer. We have already said how important prayer is to the life of the church. What verse 42 reminds us is that we must get people into the life of prayer soon so that it becomes natural to them. They must imbibe it into their lifestyle by participating in its vibrant use in the life of the church.
Are signs and wonders for today? Should we expect to see signs and wonders in our ministries today, just as people did in the apostolic age (v. 43)? Some feel that such activity ceased after the apostolic period.25 Others feel that their importance diminished after the apostolic period. Still others, however, actively promote the use of signs and wonders today.26 This is too complex a debate to enter into here. My view is that there is sufficient evidence in Acts to indicate that miraculous occurrences were an important part of the evangelistic and pastoral life of the church and that there is insufficient evidence for the view that they were intended to cease following this era.27
We would do well to heed D. A. Carson’s reminder that we do not have evidence of Jesus’ going somewhere specifically to hold a healing service.28 We must also bear in mind, however, that the early church asked God in a time of crisis to act “to heal and perform miraculous signs and wonders” (4:30). These were God’s confirmation of the message preached (14:3). Our conclusion is that ministries that express God’s miraculous power are valid for today. But we should be careful about making that the primary function of any ministry, though individuals within a ministry may have this as their primary gift.
The importance of hospitality. Hospitality is a key theme in Luke-Acts. Acts manifests several types of hospitality, one of which—having Christians over for food, fellowship, and worship—appears here (v. 46).29 The risen Christ made himself known to his disciples and taught them at the meal table (Luke 24:35, 41–43; Acts 1:4). Once he himself prepared and served a meal to his disciples (John 21:9–14). And when he chose a symbol to help his followers remember his work of redemption, he turned to the supper motif (Luke 22:13–20). Christ’s Last Supper was part of a festival meal; today, there is a meal-type fellowship that characterizes the celebration of the Lord’s Supper.
In the post-ascension life of the church, we find references to the Upper Room (where the disciples were staying, 1:13) and to the house where they were on the day of Pentecost (2:2). Moreover, “koinonia at table becomes the socio-religious hallmark of the young Jerusalem church (2:42, 46).”30 One scholar has named this first group of residential believers “the Lukan banquet community.”31 Mary the mother of John Mark opened her house for the fellowship (12:12–17). At the end of Acts, as at the start (1:4), we find two references to hospitality, this time by Paul the prisoner (28:17, 30–31). We know that later the church had fellowship meals that they called “love feasts” (Jude 12; cf. 2 Peter 2:13).
It is probable that the house was an evangelistic center too. The Bolivian theologian Mortimer Arias describes the habit of house fellowship in Acts as “centripetal mission or evangelization by hospitality.” He argues that this is a factor in the proclamation of the gospel that we need to take far more seriously.32 We know that in Corinth, when Paul was driven out of the synagogue, he went to the home of Titius Justus (Acts 18:7). We can assume that the houses where the evangelistic outreach took place became house churches. In fact, until the middle of the third century, Christians usually gathered in homes (Rom. 16:23; Col. 4:15; Philem. 2).33 These were key centers of Christian fellowship, and they can be so today as well.
Sincerity, joy, and praise in fellowship. As mentioned above, the early Christians developed an attitude toward each other that enabled them to truly enjoy each other, especially when they met for meals (v. 46). The early church, of course, followed the example of Jesus, who enjoyed his meals so much that he was accused of being “a glutton and a drunkard” (Luke 7:34). He broke the stereotype of a religious person in whose presence others were not supposed to have fun. One of the keys to enabling this was sincerity, which gave rise to an openhearted fellowship. Today, too, we should encourage enjoyment in our fellowship groups.
In the house groups time was given for praise (v. 47). In a similar manner, praise should be constantly heard when we get together in our groups.
Can we also enjoy favor with outsiders? The early Christians also enjoyed the favor of the people outside the church (v. 47), which is often the case with a new work of God. Unfortunately, such favor does not always last for long, for those who admire the life of Christians soon come to realize the implications of their message. They realize they are being challenged to make a decision about adopting Christianity and rejecting their own cherished religion. Vested interests of some powerful groups become jeopardized. Thus, admiration is replaced by fear and opposition. This happened in Jerusalem especially as a result of the ministry of Stephen. Note 8:1: “On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria.”
However, in the midst of it all, the radiant testimonies of Christians will leave their mark, even with people hostile to Christianity. This is apparently the effect that James (the Just), the brother of Jesus, had on the people of Jerusalem. But he too was martyred in A.D. 62. Josephus writes that this verdict was not popular with the people. Later stories of uncertain accuracy speak eloquently of James’s exceptional life of godliness.34
Contemporary Significance
THE CHALLENGE OF immediate follow-through care. Experience in evangelistic ministry shows that during the first few days after a commitment has been made to Christ, Satan will do all he can to ensnare new believers into his traps. They will face doubts regarding what has happened to them and be tempted to sin, sometimes even succumbing to it. This will make them fear that they do not have the strength to make it spiritually. Then they will face persecution and ridicule. They will become discouraged over the behavior of other Christians, and sometimes even become discouraged with God since he does not seem to answer their prayers. They may get entangled in the cares and attractions of the world and may trip and fall. These and a host of other factors will challenge the commitment they have made. Thus, like newborn babies, new believers need special care during the first few days of their spiritual life.
Usually, however, those involved in organizing a big evangelistic campaign are so drained of their energy at the end of it that they need some rest, and the follow-through process gets delayed. This can be disastrous to the lives of babes in Christ. For this reason it is important that plans for “neonatal care” be made before the birth of the babies and that this process of follow-through care occurs immediately after the evangelistic program. John Wesley considered this so important that he is reported to have said, “I determined not to strike in one place where I could not follow the blow.” The organized system he developed to conserve the fruit is considered one of the secrets of the long-term effectiveness of the Wesleyan Revival.
Community living in an individualistic age. People today are so individualistic that the biblical idea of community seems strange to them. We live private lives without interference from others. We will open up certain segments of our lives to certain people because that is a necessary part of living in society. But that comes nowhere close to the biblical ideal of devoting ourselves to the fellowship (v. 42) and having “everything in common” (v. 44). If we have emotional problems, for example, we go to a professional therapist who is not part of our regular social contacts and who helps us in a detached manner. In this way we find solutions for our problems without having others invade our lives and disturb our privacy.
The idea of commitment to a community is alien in this culture, characterized by transient relationships. People change spouses readily when one relationship becomes undesirable and/or another becomes desirable. People regularly change jobs for advancement and convenience and often go to work for a competitor they once worked at overtaking. The idea of twenty-or thirty-year veterans in an institution is regarded as a relic from a past era. People move homes all the time so that the chances of being committed to a community is minimized. One unifying factor of a community is the teams that represent it in sports. But these sports teams often have players from outside who come not because of any commitment to the community but because of the attractiveness of the package of payments and benefits.
In earlier times residents of a neighborhood had to depend on each other in order to survive. Now such need is minimized so that sometimes no one even knows that a person who lived alone next door has died until there is obvious evidence of the death (such as mail and newspapers accumulated outside the house, or a foul smell emanating from it).
Yet we as human beings are communal beings. We cannot find real fulfillment in life unless our community life is meaningful. Therefore groups, both within and outside the church, that encourage strong community life often experience growth. I once expressed to an eminent British Christian sociologist, Alan Storkey, my sense of despair over the fact that people no longer seem to need the church. I told him that television and the availability of services for needs that the church once met has taken away from people the need for being deeply involved in a Christian community. He told me that we should view this as an opportunity facing the church. Life without community creates a deep void in people’s lives, which the church can fill admirably if we would get down to truly practicing Christian community.
It is a well-established fact, for example, that many so-called psychological problems are solved best within the context of a caring community.35 This type of community is also a great help in keeping Christians morally pure. The joy, enrichment, and security that come from a caring community outweigh by far the pain and inconvenience that come with getting close to people. So the time is ripe for Christians to present to the world a community that is radically different from the existing social structures of society.
In spite of this need for a prophetic presence, however, churches seem to be aping the prevailing structures in society rather than challenging them. Professionalism, not spiritual compatibility, governs the hiring practices of many Christian churches and groups. Much of the reflection on management and organizational life that is taking place in the church today uses as its basic material concepts derived from the business world, where the culture of individualism reigns. People change churches and groups with the same frequency evident in the rest of society. The rate of divorce in the Western church is not much different from the rest of society, and our churches in the East seem to be catching up with their counterparts in the West.
Many strategists within the church are asking for paradigm shifts in our organizational life. But the paradigms they recommend are primarily those found in the business world. We should rather be searching the Scriptures with an open mind, uncluttered by preconceived notions, to see whether we have lost some of its teachings on community life. The Scriptures are usually used today not to derive truth but to reinforce or illustrate truth derived from secular management studies.
Consider some of the essential differences between business ventures and the church. In business the philosophy of competitiveness clashes at many points with the Christian teaching regarding the oneness of all the body of Christ. The business model works through paid workers whereas the church is essentially a volunteer movement. The business model is driven by a profit motive whereas the church is driven by the empowering of the Spirit and by a desire to see God glorified. In business the strong thrive (“the survival of the fittest”) whereas in the church the weak are used not because of their natural ability but because of God’s power.
I believe that there is much we can learn from the business world as those in it strive to achieve success in a world created by God. But we must always be restrained by the fact that there are major differences in the goals and the methods of these two spheres. If we do not remember that, our churches are going to be run like businesses. Thus, we urgently need to reexamine the principles governing our community life in light of what the Scriptures say about it. We must explore more fully the implications of the devotion to the fellowship that Christians practiced in the first century. The book of Acts is a great place to start such a study.
Desire for teaching as an evidence of conversion. The value of and challenges to a teaching ministry today are dealt with in other studies of this commentary.36 Let me say here that openness to being fed by the Word is key evidence that one is truly regenerated. Many people come to Christ to have a felt need met because they hear that the God of the Christians is a prayer-answering God. In their eagerness to be blessed by this God, they go through the motions of “making a decision.” Since the possibilities of prayer attracted them to Christ, they may give a high place to prayer. But how do we know that the seed of eternal life is germinating in them? If there is such a seed, it will hunger for the nourishment of the Word. Peter states this principle by using a metaphor from human life: “Like newborn babies, crave pure spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow up in your salvation” (1 Peter 2:2).
The Lord’s Supper and follow-through care today. The Roman Catholic Church gave an interpretation of the Lord’s Supper as a means of grace that was almost a means of salvation. In reaction the Protestants of the low church and evangelical traditions may have gone too far in discounting the significance of the Lord’s Supper as a means of growth in the Christian life. While focusing on remembrance and thanksgiving, we may have ignored the power of its symbolism in helping us understand and internalize what really happened at Calvary. In reacting to an overemphasis on the presence of Christ in the elements (transubstantiation), we may have forgotten that Christ is indeed present at this communion meal in a special way (1 Cor. 10:16).
If the Lord’s Supper is so important to our spiritual growth, should we not open it up for new believers? This is a problem because, unlike in the early church, new believers are usually not immediately baptized today. Many churches offer the Lord’s Supper only to those who have expressed their solidarity with the people of God through baptism. But baptism is delayed until suitable instruction has been given. Roland Allen, in his influential book Missionary Methods: St. Paul’s or Ours? has demonstrated that Paul’s strategy was to baptize people and introduce them to the Lord’s Supper immediately after conversion. The bulk of the “teaching followed, it did not precede, baptism. For baptism, apparently, very little knowledge of Christian truth was required.”37
Practices associated with the Lord’s Supper are an intimate part of the heritage of many churches. Often these have emerged after much struggle and pain, and so churches are touchy about any changes being made in connection with them. But it may be worth reconsidering whether it is wise to delay the entry of new believers into the Lord’s Table—up to as much as a year after conversion. In the early church the table was opened to converts immediately after conversion.
Another tradition worth reconsidering is that of infrequent celebration of the Lord’s Supper. Some churches have it only two times a year. In some denominations this infrequency arose out of a lack, during their early years, of ordained people who could do the rounds of the different churches and give communion. Later that established the practice of the denomination for the Lord’s Supper. This was clearly not the practice of the early church.
Ministering in the miraculous. The early Christians prayed for signs and wonders to accompany their ministry (4:30) for, as Acts shows, such signs won the attention of those uninterested in the gospel. As we seek to make evangelistic inroads into non-Christian groups, it is appropriate for us to pray that God will reveal himself in some unmistakable way. This does not mean that miracles should be confined only to the evangelistic setting. True, the miracles of Jesus had an evangelistic function in giving support to his claims.38 But at other times he performed them because of his compassion.39 Moreover, some miracles were also performed on believers.40 The Gospels and Acts show that miracles did not necessarily trigger faith in everyone and that what was most important is that people heard the message of the gospel. But miracles also did help in opening people’s minds to hear this good news.
The evangelistic value of a ministry of miracles is well expressed in the response of Sergius Paulus to Paul’s ministry in Paphos. When he saw the power of God as Paul struck the false prophet Elymas with blindness, “he believed, for he was amazed at the teaching about the Lord” (Acts 13:12). The teaching about the Lord had been faithfully done; the miracle helped orient Sergius Paulus in the direction of accepting this teaching.
The gospel facts must always have the supreme place in our ministries. The message communicated by miracles is by no means the total gospel. It proclaims some aspects about God: for example, that God is powerful and worthy of attention, and that he can get involved in people’s lives. Miracles are not an essential norm for biblical evangelism. But they are a means commonly used by God. Unfortunately, today we have the situation of a sign-mania on the part of some Christians and a sign-phobia on the part of others.
We must always remember that God sovereignly gives gifts to his children. As a result, we must not demand that each minister of the gospel and each church have ministries that work in the miraculous realm. However, I think one reason why many do not see the miraculous in their ministries is that they simply do not have the faith to believe that God can use them in this way. Some prefer not to have these gifts, while others do not feel constrained to ask God to give such gifts. It may be true that the giving of these gifts is often linked to the openness of people to them. But we know of several people who received such gifts without ever wishing for them or asking for them. Our passion should be for having all that God wishes for us—nothing more, nothing less. Towards that end we pray.
Unfortunately, the abuses of “power ministry” today are many.41 But that should not deter us from engaging in it. It is a practice modeled by the apostles in Acts. We should never fear to be biblical. Only when this is done in an unbiblical way do abuses arise.
House fellowships today. Today most growing churches have found house fellowships as an effective means of nurture and evangelism. Effective large churches (e.g., the Full Gospel Church in Seoul, Korea; new churches in South America) have found in the house fellowship the ideal place for nurture and intimate fellowship to grow. Many of us are aware of how the church in China thrived and grew through their house churches in what is numerically probably the largest church growth in this century—and that was at a time when meeting together was illegal. In the busy West and the urban areas of the world, where it is difficult for people to find time to come to church more than once a week, neighborhood fellowships meeting at times convenient to the members could begin to take a more and more significant role.
Informal fellowship like this takes away pretense and helps people to be themselves. This in turn opens the door to deep sharing. It also helps the many lonely people in today’s competitive and fast-moving society to find a place where they are loved and accepted. The home is also a suitable place for evangelism because non-Christians who feel uneasy about entering a church may feel more at home in a friend’s house. Home fellowships also give people not gifted in public ministry an opportunity for effective ministry for the kingdom.
Yet today many Christians are reluctant to host others in their homes.42 An American pastor, Donald Bubna, surveyed Christians to find reasons for this reluctance. The two main reasons he found were: (1) having guests frightens some prospective hosts, and (2) some felt their home furnishings were too modest or inadequate. Others said they were too busy, the expense of showing hospitality was too great, and the tension and exhaustion from getting the house cleaned and the food prepared was too much for them.43
Bubna suggests that the most common reasons for the reluctance to host others stem from pride. “To be ashamed of our furniture or afraid of serving an inadequate meal can best be described as pride.” The same point is made by Karen Burton Mains, who writes, “True hospitality comes before pride.”44 It has “nothing to do with impressing people, but everything to do with making them feel welcome and wanted.” Mrs. Mains is a pastor’s wife, and many church activities were held in her home. For years it seemed as if she “did nothing but clean up after people.” After each group left, she had to get the house back into shape so that it would be ready for the next group. Yet she was not a housekeeper by nature. Sometimes she delayed cleaning up the house if company was not expected. On one such day someone from the church came to visit her. The house was in a mess. Let Mrs. Mains tell what happened:
Hospitality before pride . . . I reminded myself dismally. Determined, I welcomed the woman with warmth, invited her into the unsightly rooms and refused to embarrass her with apologies. I consciously let go of my pride. [The visitor’s response amazed her.] “I used to think you were perfect,” she said, “but now I think we can be friends.”
This story is not intended to provide an excuse for keeping an untidy house. Rather, it is to show that the key to hospitality is not our performance as housekeepers and cooks but an openhearted friendship that makes people feel welcome and wanted. The fellowship is the main thing. The food is secondary, as Jesus tried to show Martha (Luke 10:38–42).
Sincerity, joy, and praise in fellowship. The importance of gladness and sincerity in Christian fellowship cannot be overestimated. As indicated above, Jesus himself set the precedent for this (see Luke 7:34). When the Creator came into the world, even though he came as a man of sorrows, he had a place for fun in his life, for he was the complete person, and fun has a place in human completeness. In our hedonistic world, it is so important to remember that God is the Creator of our capacity for pleasure. If so, this capacity can be completely satisfied only in his way. The “life . . . to the full” that Christ gives (John 10:10) involves the fulfillment of our capacity for pleasure as well. This involves enjoyment in community with gladness and sincerity (v. 46) in a way different to the unreal acting we see often. This acting may appear as pleasurable, but in reality it is hollow and hypocritical.
The entertainment industry works hard at catering to the capacity for pleasure in us. Unfortunately, much of the means they use violate our essential humanity in seeking to elicit pleasure through what the Bible regards as sinful.45 When we violate our essential humanity, while we may get a temporary “kick” of pleasure, we will be left unfulfilled and empty. Today’s church is challenged to demonstrate a holy, happy fellowship.
The evidence, however, is that even Christians have succumbed to the lure of sinful pleasure afforded by the world. Some find it difficult to sit through a beautiful movie because their minds have been numbed by repeated doses of sex and violence. More and more people are retreating into a private world of pleasure through the use of videos, cable TV, video games, and the Internet. But human beings are by nature gregarious. When people taste the beauty of joyous fellowship, they will be confronted with a more pleasurable source of joy than their private world of “media” pleasure. They will be encouraged to seek a better way.
How can we ensure that praise has a high place in the agenda of our small groups? The most important requirement is separating time for it. Some of the praise will be offered at specially set-aside times, using hymns and prayers. Then when people are given the opportunity to share testimonies of what God has done to them, praise will result.
Praise is a factor that lifts the spirits of people who live under pressure because of challenges they face in life. They come to an environment that focuses on God; they listen to testimonies and sing songs that remind them of eternal realities that do not change. They receive a lift so that they too can praise God. Praise is a discipline we must learn to cultivate when we meet. It is so easy to let the challenges the group faces and the study time to so fill the program of our small groups that we can neglect praise.