Balance

 Which is more important? Overseas missions or local missions? Caring for church members or ministering outside of the church? Being part of the “fellowship” or welcoming new people?

I’ve heard reasons, defenses, and excuses for things that the church has morphed into, all throughout my years of pastoral ministry. 

Today’s Church is quite different from the Acts 2 Church. The reasons have been talked about and analyzed extensively. It is prudent to learn all that we can about the function of the early Church, and I admit that I’m no church history expert. However, I believe that the function of the Church throughout the ages is not either/or, but BALANCE.

Acts 2:42 (NKJV) says, “And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.”

I propose that the four characteristics of the Acts 2 Church delineate that balance. Perhaps my view of these characteristics could be debated by Biblical scholars among whom I don’t claim to be. However, I do believe that I’m not too far off. What was important in the first century is still important today.

The first characteristic of being DEVOTED TO THE APOSTLES’ DOCTRINE (teaching) was critical to the early Church. We have the body of Scripture in the Bible, but the early Church did not. I think one of the weaknesses of the contemporary Church is that by and large many do not know doctrine and are deficient in Bible knowledge. Peter exhorted the Church to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ…” If more were so devoted, there would be fewer anemic Christians. Some have even been known to say the Lord told them to do something that is totally contrary to the Bible.

The second characteristic was how the early Church FELLOWSHIPPED. Circumstances demanded that they stuck together, cared for each other, shared their resources, and encouraged each other. Their lives depended on it. The Church is just as apt to be drawn into worldliness than to draw people into our fellowship. Church fellowship must not be exclusive, but inclusive. When we accept others in this way we have the opportunity to lead them to faith in Christ.

BREAKING OF BREAD was another characteristic of the early Church. Some say this was the Lord’s Supper (Communion) while others believe it is a reference to taking meals together. I propose that it is both. A “love feast” seemed to accompany Communion in the first century Church. Paul rebuked the church for abusing their behavior by discriminating during the meal causing some people being neglected and others being eating well, before sharing the Lord’s Supper. Potluck dinners have their own history in most churches. Christians love to eat. (I’m looking forward to the “marriage supper of the Lamb.”) What a feast that will be! Whether the Church gathers to eat IN the church building (I believe prohibition to do so is a misguided interpretation of Scripture) or at another location, it is still a viable function of the Church. 

Finally, the Church was devoted in PRAYERS. I ask you to search your own heart in this matter. Over the years, every prayer initiative I’ve attempted in my churches has died over time for lack of participation. For some, daily personal prayers might be measured in saying grace before meals and a short bedtime prayer, if we can stay awake long enough. God moved mightily in the first century in part because people prayed. What might be accomplished today in and through the Church if we had the same devotion? I will let you ponder that question personally.

Each of us has our passion and preferences for what our church should be doing. Your passion might not be my passion. Your zeal might not be shared by others. Demanding unanimous agreement with your agenda is divisive and disrespects those whom God may be leading differently. 

My conclusion is that there needs to be BALANCE. Diversity exists everywhere, including in the Church. Let’s not be threatened by it, but embrace it with balance, to the glory of God.