First Century Church in the Twenty First, “No Thanks”

[Karl Edwards]

Lots of Christians talk about getting back to the first century church, by which they mean somewhere between Pentecost and Pauls imprisonment. That period is perceived to be a time of great excitement when believers were “doing the word”, when revelation was in abundance and signs miracles and wonders were constantly evident in their lives, aka “all nine all the time”. With a belief in most evangelical Pentecostal type churches that believers should do the same things today, the cry of “back to the first century church”, has become a staple mantra and a personal objective for many individuals, however all efforts always lead to abject failure.

There are those who reluctantly accept this, blaming themselves for their inability to live up to the first century standard, others live in hope that someday they will be able to “hear clearly” from God and perform a miracle, but worse off are those who live with the delusion that they are operating “power from on high” and the fact that they have never managed to heal even a headache never seems to deter them. These are those who “hear from God” on a regular basis and instruct people in Gods will from their own imagination, often causing unnecessary hurt, both physically and mentally to the body of Christ.

The present day church will never get “back to the first century church” or “back to Pentecost” and I for one am quite happy about that. Mostly because the Pentecostal era was a part of the Old Testament program concerned with ushering in the kingdom of God on earth. Those who were endowed with the power from on high were the same people who were promised this outpouring in the OT scriptures, see Ezekiel 36:25-27, Isaiah 44:3-5, Isaiah 32:15 and of course Joel 2:28,29, they, the nation of Israel, were the focus of the Acts period. This comes as a surprise to most Christians who believe that Pentecost was the beginning of the church that they belong to, but gentiles in the Acts period were no different to gentiles in the OT, only now they were saved by believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, so as always, they were blessed through Israel; however their status was still inferior to believing Jews, being only a graft into the fatness of the olive tree of Israel. (Rom 11:17,18).

During the Acts period there was no heavenly calling, no “seated in the heavenlies”, no “far above all principalities and powers and might and dominion”, no “joint heirs, no joint body and no joint partakers in the promises”. This came after Israel was set aside at Acts 28:28, taking their place as one of the nations. Romans 11:18 and Ephesians 3:6 ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, if one is true, the other cannot be, therefore during the Acts period Israel was still under the law and with the law came both blessing and judgments.

Those who stood for the Lord during the Acts were truly blessed, with the power they manifested and the signs, miracles and wonders that they witnessed, but they also knew what they were in for.

Mark 13:9 But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.

This was the Acts period, Peter and John were beaten James and Stephen exemplified the true meaning of witness (martyr), as did most of the apostles later in their lives. This was part and parcel of living for God during the Acts as was the judgement on Ananias and Sapphira for lying to the Holy Spirit, plus the judgment on believers who failed to discern the Lords body becoming sick and in some cases, dying. James 5:15,16 (an Acts period epistle written to believing Jews) shows how sin lead to sickness and 1 John 5:16 shows that there was a sin unto death which, no doubt, some of the Corinthian believers had commited and which there was no point in praying for.

Back to the first century church, no thanks, I am happy to live in the “age of grace”, where God chooses to tie the hand of judgement behind his back and where we are forgiven for Christ's sake.

God bless

[Michael Prahm]

So when it says So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed, that it was by some other standard, some other method.

II Timothy methodically lays out the ruin of the church. Methodically. 4 steps 1. they turned from Paul 1;15
2. concerning the truth have erred. 2:18 3. resist the truth 3:8 4. they turn their ears from the truth 4:4

There is not other context but the context, of the book of acts in which to place the entirety of the new testament writings, which means that everything written is applicable as demonstrated in the book of Acts, with the exception of course of events future..

As feeble as the United States is, yet it has been the simple persistent truth of our brief history, that has been echoed again and again, that those who understand their endowment from their Creator, those who have uncovered those inalienable right's have demonstrated in manners practical, how fruitful our fellowship with God has been since THE DAY OF PENTECOST forward. In one moment we have gone from no standing to high esteem.

[Allan & Selina Woodhouse]

Thanks Karl, yeah Melbournes great :) I'm not really into any debates about this says "this" this way up or whatever...if something adds or enhances my fellowship with Him, enables me to walk with a bit more power, I'd prob take a peek at it, otherwise, I'm way over concordances & interlinears etc... we are in Seaford btw, on the bay.

[Karl Edwards]

Sorry Allan

should also say if it's still not clear I can elabortae if you want...

Melbourne, love it.... summers coming :-)

Cheers

Karl

[Karl Edwards]

Hi Allan

I know you live in Melbourne...
that comment was directed to Charlie, you need to read his posting and it should make sense

Cheers

Karl

[Allan & Selina Woodhouse]

Not sure what you mean by "show you the church which is his body in Thessalonians" ?
I happen to live in Melbourne, Australia also :)

[Karl Edwards]

John,

You just have the best attitude, you always have something good to say about all viewpoints, we so often forget to love one another when we get caught up in doctrinal disputes. Some other Christians forums I have been on are just a disgrace, the way they treat each other, there is so much in the scriptures about our behaviour as believers and our attitudes to each other.

One of the big things for me is that it is OK to disagree, we only see through a glass darkly now anyway, even with our best viewing angle, someday we will know, but that day is not now. I do get a little enthuastic, because I believe that my view makes great sense when given the light of day and maybe to Emils surprise I feel a great affinity with Way Corps, knowing that we have all been through a really unique experience, however due to the constant hostility, I think my posting days here will be short.

If you ever get the chance to come the land of Oz you are more than welcome to stay.

Cheers


Karl

[John Richeson]

"Stones thrown at people are different form stones thrown at doctrines or systems of theology. Mine are squarely aimed at a doctrinal position....."

Karl, I agree with you on that point. To me it seems that was your intention and that you have remained level headed in spite of your controversial findings. I appreciate that.

I believe what I believe. I do not need to be defensive about it if someone believes or posts otherwise. I can always change the channell?

It was Dr. Wierwielle from whom I first hear the wise phrase "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

Karl, I also agree with you that if one wants to truly debate this subject matter then it's best to provide scriptural rebuttal like Ken has so aptly done. I will admit that I do not have the desire to do such biblical research. Call me a casual armchair researcher I guess. Therefore I am not qualified to really debate this topic from a scriptural view unless I got busy and cranked it up.

But I know what I believe anyway. I doubt I will change. Still, It is always interesting to read differing viewpoints. We never got much opportunity in our past did we? All churches were labled as either wrong or possessed. It seemed to me like we did biblical research from the point of predefined beliefs rather that from an objective view. Sometimes it seemed like if something did not fit with what we believed from our classes then it HAD to be wrong.

My point is....why not have honest and civil biblical debate? What harm? No one is saying you are evil if you speak in tongues are they?

PS - Emil, I hope we can meet when you are in Orlando this week like you suggested. That would be awesome if I can swing it. I sent you an Email about it. Karl I wish you lived in Melbourne, Florida instead of Melbourne, Austrailia and you could join us. I bet we would find more common ground we agreed on than not.

[Karl Edwards]

Common Emil

be honest.. That’s the first civil post you've made since I first cordially invited you to discuss the issues raised, which invite, you refused to display. I have no desire to get personal or insult anyone as John quite rightly says it accomplishes nothing. However I see nothing wrong with questioning, debating or defending a system of belief, which is totally different from insulting the individual. If what I say offends your belief system, so what? Let your belief system stand on its own merit. Stones thrown at people are different form stones thrown at doctrines or systems of theology. Mine are squarely aimed at a doctrinal position which has caused much harm to the body of Christ (Ken, look beyond your own personal experience to the myriad of so called healers and miracles workers who have caused untold damage to Christians, some even resulting in death, it’s a sham where as always gentiles end up offering sacrifice to their idols.)

For a number of years now the Islamists at the UN have been pushing to introduce a blasphemy bill to pass laws that prohibiting criticism of Islam in Western countries. Most Islamic countries have such a law in place which is why we see such suppression of freedom of speech. While most Western countries will never succumb to passing such a radical bill (except Ireland… holy mother of God…, http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2009/07/14/criticizing-islam-no...), we are beginning to see the soft laws under the guise of political correctness and religious tolerance doing just that, i.e. promoting this non criticism of Islam, which is mostly due to fear. Being married to an ex-Muslim I have had the 'pleasure' of discussing ‘religion’ with many religious Muslims over the years. I am always amazed at how angry they immediately get when I say the slightest thing that they consider to be offensive and I always think how idiotic. If Islam is so sensitive to criticism it must have some very big holes, I’m sure you’ll agree as you have all probably had similar experiences, but check your own reactions to my post, let your doctrine stand on its own two legs, don’t delve into anger and personal abuse, nor will I.

Charlie… I have to say, did you read the entire posts? Please do before Emil’s actions of humility and tolerance go down in folklore. One challenge Charlie and one promise. If you can show me “the church which is His body” in 1st or second Thessalonians then I will eat humble pie, remove my post and leave the forum never to return.

Ken is the only one so far who has given a scriptural rebuttal but he also could not refrain from making it personal, and somehow also justifying Emil’s behaviour, however for anyone who is actually interested in following the issues and not the controversy I will be posting a separate reply addressed to Ken’s points. For anyone interested in the controversy I will also be posting a rebuttal to Ken’s personal comments, which I really wish I didn’t have to do.

See Ken… I really believe that if you just posted the scriptural rebuttal part of your post most people would not even notice…

Remember this though…. Whether you like it or not, we will be spending eternity together

[Allan & Selina Woodhouse]

ASTONISHING !! that's about all I can say :( to 'speak in tongues', having 'tasted' of the goodness of God and...then to dismiss it, nay, speak against it... gobsmacked (note : nothing personal said )

[John Richeson]

Thanks Ken. I try to do the best I can with the time limits I have.

What I have found in my limited experience in posting is to avoid getting personal and insulting. It does no good whatsoever. Just makes things worse. Civil discussion and scriptural documentation and debate is what seems to work best, although it is harder work.

For the record, I believe in the power of the Lord Jesus Christ today in our hearts via the holy spirit and I definitely believe in miracles that are from God. However, I do not believe those miracles are reserved ONLY for those who are born again. God's perrogative (sp?). Just my personal viewpoint.