02.02. Part One: An Examination of Acts

PART ONE, AN EXAMINATION OF ACTS In our survey of Acts we will note those instances in which the opportunity was presented for the establishment of some sort of authority beyond that of local church leaders. Of special note will be those cases in which the nature of the situation seemed to call for such a structure.

Case Study #1, The Birth of the Church in Samaria The first inter-congregational event recorded in Acts was the sending of Peter and John to the newly established church in the city of Samaria. The birth of a church in Samaria resulted from Saul’s persecution of the Jerusalem Church, causing many Christians to flee the city.

Philip, a deacon of the Jerusalem Church, fled to Samaria, where he immediately preached the Gospel of Christ. His preaching was accompanied by credentialing miracles. As a result, a large portion of the city became believers and were baptized. The Jerusalem Church responded to the news of the newly- born Samaritan Church by sending two apostles to visit the area.

If a supra-congregational authority were to be put into place anywhere, one would expect it to happen here. The main reason for this expectation is the contempt that Jerusalem Jews held toward the Samaritans. Samaria was inhabited by mongrel Jews whose religious history was mixed. At certain points, their theology and interpretation of the Law of Moses conflicted with Jewish orthodoxy. Because of this history, it would not be surprising if the “Mother Church” in Jerusalem and the apostles in particular were suspicious of the Samaritan’s ability to remain true to the essentials of the faith. So, some sort of oversight from Jerusalem would seem to be a responsible action.

Another reason for us to expect the apostles to institute some sort of supra-congregational authority was the apostolic government of the Church. Up to this point, the entire church had been located in Jerusalem and the apostles were the government over the Church. Given their special place in the Kingdom, it would be a very natural and expected action for the apostles to extend their governmental role to Samaria, thus continuing to be the government of the entire church. Contrary to our expectations, Acts records no imposition of Jerusalem authority upon the Samaritans, Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost…. And they, when they had testified and preached the word of the Lord, returned to Jerusalem, and preached the gospel in many villages of the Samaritans.

2 No statement is made as to why Peter and John were sent to Samaria. Judging by their activity, they went to Samaria to enlarge the Kingdom by bestowing the Holy Spirit and by preaching in villages. However, the above account pictures neither the Jerusalem church nor the apostolic team as exercising authority over the Samaritan church. After imparting the Holy Spirit, they left Samaria in the hands of the Spirit.4 Case Study #2, The Birth of the Gentile Church in Caesarea The second opportunity for supra-congregational authority to be put into place is recorded in Acts 10:1-48 and Acts 11:1-30. This is the record of Peter’s preaching the Gospel to the household of Cornelius, and the Jerusalem church’s response to this event. For our purposes, we are interested only in the Jerusalem church’s response.

Peter had been directed, sovereignly, to travel to Caesarea and to preach Christ to those gathered in the home of Cornelius, a Roman Centurion. This was the first time that the Gospel had been preached to Gentiles. When Peter returned from Caesarea, he reported to the Jerusalem Church leaders what had happened in the home of Cornelius. Initially, he was criticized for fraternizing with Gentiles. He quieted his critics by describing God’s sovereign bestowal of the Holy Spirit upon the Gentiles. When they heard Peter’s report, the Jerusalem leaders responded, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

3 That was it. Once again, where one might expect some sort of paternal extra-congregational oversight to be imposed, there was none. Even though the Christians in Caesarea were uninstructed Gentiles, they were left in the hands of the Holy Spirit.

Case Study #3 The Birth of the Church in Antioch The third opportunity for a Jerusalem-based ecclesiastical hierarchy is found in the Acts 11:19 ff. This is the record of the spread of the Gospel to Antioch. At the same time that Philip had fled to Samaria, other Christians fled to Antioch. At first, these refugee evangelists preached only to Jews. However, in a short while, some also preached to Gentiles and a large church quickly came to exist. When the Jerusalem Church heard that a large number of Antiochans had become believers, they sent Barnabas to look in on them. Again, observe the absence of any hint of a “Jerusalem is headquarters” mentality. And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.

Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch.

Who, when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord. For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith: and much people was added unto the Lord. Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul: And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch. And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.

4 Why did the Jerusalem church send Barnabas to Antioch? Again, we are not told.

However, judging from Barnabas’ described activity, it was to encourage the new church and to teach new converts the things of God. Note that when a company of Jerusalem prophets came to 5 Antioch, they did not come in the role of ecclesiastical authorities. Instead, they brought a prophetic word to the church, especially about coming world conditions. So, once again, we find no record of supra-congregational authority in the relationship between Jerusalem and Antioch.

Case Study #4 Church Planting on the First Missionary Journey The next account in Acts that presents a situation in which supra-congregational authority could have occurred is the record of Paul & Barnabas’ first missionary journey. Here, home-base is not Jerusalem, but Antioch. At the instruction of the Holy Spirit, the leadership in Antioch released Barnabas and Saul (Paul) for the work into which the Holy Spirit had called them. They set out on their first missionary trip, taking the Gospel to many cities in various Roman provinces. There were converts in every city in which they preached. Paul and Barnabas were not allowed to remain long in each city. Persecution by the Jews forced them to preach and then to move on. This was an area quite removed from both Jerusalem and Antioch. The new churches had not enjoyed the benefit of a sustained visit from an apostle. There had been no opportunity to disciple the converts and to firmly ground them in matters of the faith. All were new converts who would face opposition and possible persecution. Surely here was a situation that called for some sort of supra-congregational or apostolic oversight. Again, our expectations are not fulfilled. And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, having prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed. (Acts 14:23) As Paul and Barnabas retraced their steps, they exercised their apostolic authority by ordaining elders in every city, leaving each congregation under the oversight of its local elders. No accountability network between the churches nor over the churches was established by Paul & Barnabas. Significant to our discussion is the description of Paul & Barnabas’ return to Antioch. And when they were come, and had gathered the church together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles. And there they abode long time with the disciples.

5 There was not the slightest suggestion that Paul and Barnabas should have set up some sort of accountability network. The local leaders under the oversight of the Holy Spirit was considered to be sufficient.

Case Study #5 The Jerusalem Council

Acts 15:1-41 is extremely important to the question of supra-congregational authority. When Judaizing teachers from Judea came to Antioch, telling the Gentiles that they must follow the Mosaic Law in order to be saved, Paul and Barnabas had “great dissension and debate with them.” The entire ministry of grace was being challenged by these Judaizing teachers. The fact that these teachers had come from Jerusalem gave credence to their teaching. Yet, Paul, Barnabas, and the Antioch Church knew that hundreds had been saved and given the Holy Spirit, apart from the Law. What was to be done? The Antioch church responded in a responsible manner. They decided to send to Jerusalem a group of respected men from their church,6 including Paul and Barnabas. This group would discuss with the apostles and elders at Jerusalem, the controversy caused by the Judaizing teachers from Judaea. The record does not report whether or not the Antioch church considered the Apostles and elders of Jerusalem to be authoritative in this matter. Did they send their delegation to work out the problem, as “brother to brother,” or did they send the delegation to hear from “headquarters”? We are not told. For certain, there was a desire to know the truth and, by implication, there was a desire to avoid a schism between Antioch and Jerusalem. Our Lord had told His disciples how to handle differences (Matthew 5:23-24; Matthew 18:15-18). Although the teachings of Jesus did not fit this situation literally, the Antioch Church displayed the spirit of what Christ taught.

How did the apostles and elders of Jerusalem view themselves in this matter? Were they an authority to which all churches had to submit? The revelatory apostles 6 (the Twelve and Paul) were the means of solving all problems of orthodoxy. However, this was a situation in which the Judaizers had challenged Paul’s revelatory role and the accuracy of his teaching. Galatians 2:1-2 describes Paul’s attitude and motivation toward the Jerusalem conference, Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also. And it was because of a revelation that I went up; and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but I did so in private to those who were of reputation, for fear that I might be running, or had run, in vain.

Outwardly, Paul went up to Jerusalem because he had been appointed to do so by the brethren in Antioch. Inwardly, however, he had been prompted to do so by the Lord. The Antioch church’s sending Paul to Jerusalem was confirmation of what Paul sensed in his spirit, i.e, that he and Barnabas should go to Jerusalem and settle this matter once and for all. When he and the Antioch delegation arrived in Jerusalem, Paul wisely consulted with the apostolic leaders before entering the council. Paul knew that the source of his teaching was the same as that of the Twelve (the Holy Spirit).

9 He assumed that he and the Twelve would be in agreement, unless someone’s flesh got in the way, as it did with Peter and Barnabas in Antioch.

10 Paul and Barnabas knew where they stood with the Twelve, when the deliberations described in Acts 15:6 ff began. The outcome of the council seems to have been a foregone conclusion.

It must be said that the Twelve and the Jerusalem elders occupied a position that no one else ever has occupied. The Twelve were chosen by Jesus in a very public manner to be his revelators 11. The church was born in Jerusalem, under the Holy Spirit directed ministry of the Twelve. Until Paul’s call and commissioning, all of the spreading Church was an outgrowth of the Jerusalem seed-bed. Therefore, if there were any challenges to Paul’s orthodoxy, this was the place to settle it. In this sense, the Jerusalem council had authority.

After the council reached consensus, they decided to record their decision in a letter to the Gentile Christians. The terminology used in reference to the letter and the terms used in the letter itself shed light on our question. First, in Acts 15:20, where the letter is proposed, James is quoted as saying, “...we write to them that they...” The Greek verb used here, ejpistei~lai 12, means simply, to write, or, as the word is used in some instances, to write instructions. James’ proposal does not imply a command. The terms used in James’ proposal are more along the lines of instructions given by one who is an authority on a subject, rather than as a decree from one who is in authority over someone. For example, one might ask an experienced carpenter how to build a staircase. He would write, “Do it this way...” These are instructions, not commands.

James’ proposal implies that he and the others considered themselves to be authorities on the truth of the matter that the council had debated.

However, the letter itself contains language that bears a greater sense of authority, For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials. 7 The Greek terminology translated, It seemed good...to us, is the language used by rabbis when making a pronouncement.

13 As F.F. Bruce points out, “But the form of the words used... is authoritative enough: it was a form widely used in the wording of imperial and other government decrees. Moreover, the four abstentions prescribed are said to be necessary.”

14 The expression, lay upon you, implies that the writers of the letter had the ability (authority) to lay these things upon the recipients of the letter. This being true, the Jerusalem conference pictured in Acts 15:1-41 was no mere debate. The council established forever the truth that the Mosaic Law is irrelevant to the issue of salvation. Grace, rather than law, was affirmed as the Good News of Jesus for all nations. This was an issue that could have been resolved only by the Twelve (which by now numbered only eleven, James having been beheaded by Herod Acts 12:1-2).

So, even though the letter is gentle, it does carry authority. Does this mean, therefore, that the New Testament pictures a “mother church” that has authority over other churches? I think not. This was an unusual situation, involving unique people (revelatory apostles), before the existence of Scripture.

15 They met to resolve a basic misunderstanding of the Gospel. This council never was repeated again. Neither the Jerusalem Church nor the Twelve considered themselves as being overseers of Paul and the spreading Kingdom of God.

Case Study #6 Paul’s Second Missionary Journey The next opportunity for supra-congregational authority to be expressed was during Paul’s second missionary journey. When Paul suggested to Barnabas that they make the trip, he proposed, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do.

16 There is no sense of oversight by an authority, it was to see how they do. When the trip took place, Silas rather than Barnabas, accompanied Paul. Note how Acts describes the team’s activity on the trip. And he was traveling through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches…Now while they were passing through the cities, they were delivering the decrees, which had been decided upon by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem, for them to observe. So the churches were being strengthened in the faith, and were increasing in number daily. (Acts 15:41; Acts 16:4) Paul is not described as traveling among these churches as a monarchical bishop, overseeing and supervising the churches under his authority. He delivered the letter from the Jerusalem council and he strengthened the churches. The picture is one of an encourager and teacher, rather than that of a ruler.

Case Study #7 Paul’s Third Missionary Journey The same picture prevails in the description of Paul’s third missionary journey. His visits to the churches strengthened all the disciples.8 And when he had landed at Caesarea, he went up and greeted the church, and went down to Antioch. And having spent some time there, he departed and passed successively through the Galatian region and Phrygia, strengthening all the disciples. (Acts 18:22-23) A very telling scene occurs toward the close of this journey. On the way to Jerusalem, while waiting at Miletus for the ship to sail, Paul sent for the elders in nearby Ephesus. The record of Paul’s meeting with these elders is recorded in Acts 20:18-38. It is one of the most touching scenes in the New Testament. And when they had come to him, he said to them, “You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia, how I was with you the whole time, serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials which came upon me through the plots of the Jews; how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and from house to house, solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.

“And now, behold, bound in spirit, I am on my way to Jerusalem, not knowing what will happen to me there, except that the Holy Spirit solemnly testifies to me in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions await me. But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, in order that I may finish my course, and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of the grace of God.

“And now, behold, I know that all of you, among whom I went about preaching the kingdom, will see my face no more. Therefore I testify to you this day, that I am innocent of the blood of all men. For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God.

“Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears.

“And now I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified.

I have coveted no one’s silver or gold or clothes. You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my own needs and to the men who were with me. In everything I showed you that by working hard in this manner you must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, ’It is more blessed to give than to receive.’“ And when he had said these things, he knelt down and prayed with them all. And they began to weep aloud and embraced Paul, and repeatedly kissed him, grieving especially over the word which he had spoken, that they should see his face no more. And they were accompanying him to the ship.9 What is atmosphere of this meeting? Is Paul meeting with them in the role of a ruling prelate? That certainly is not the sense of this meeting. Paul is pictured as relating to these men as a spiritual father. He is not pictured as relating to them governmentally. He exhorts them and brings a prophetic warning about the future.

CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE ABOVE CASES

These seven case studies exhaust the record of instances in Acts in which the possibility of a supra-local hierarchy could be displayed. The remainder of Acts is an account of Paul’s arrest, imprisonment, journey to Rome under Roman guard, and his imprisonment in Rome while awaiting trial before Caesar. None of the case studies in Acts records the existence of an hierarchy in which churches are overseen by more mature churches, a network of bishops, or a single prelate over several churches. Where there is an intimation of authority, it is in the person of one or more of the revelatory apostles, whose authority is that of being communicators and protectors of truth.

17 The revelatory function that rested in the apostles now is fulfilled through the Holy Spirit inspired Scriptures. The Acts picture is of autonomous congregations linked to one another spiritually, not organizationally.