Latest / Reformed Thinking / Theology of the Acts

Transcript

Theology of the Acts · Reformed Thinking

• 0:00
  Hello and welcome to another Dee dive here on Reform Thinking.
• 0:02
  We are glad you're with us. It's good to be here.
• 0:05
  Today we have a stack of notes on the desk and a very specific
• 0:09
  target. We are opening up The Moody
• 0:12
  Handbook of Theology, the revised and expanded edition by
• 0:16
  Paul NS. Yeah, that's a standard text for
• 0:18
  a reason. NS really has a gift for taking
• 0:21
  these massive biblical concepts and just, you know, arranging
• 0:25
  them so the structure becomes visible.
• 0:27
  We aren't looking at the whole book today, though.
• 0:29
  We're focusing on his treatment of the theology of the Acts.
• 0:33
  And I think most of us, when we think of the book of Acts, we
• 0:35
  think of it as, you know, an adventure story, right?
• 0:38
  Shipwrecks, riots, jailbreaks. Exactly.
• 0:41
  But ANZ argues that if you read it only as history, you're
• 0:45
  really missing the main point. He suggests that Luke is
• 0:48
  actually building a rigorous theological argument.
• 0:50
  That's the whole premise. It is not just a diary of where
• 0:53
  the apostles went and shows that acts as a bridge.
• 0:56
  It moves us from the life of Christ and the Gospels to the,
• 0:59
  you could say, the life of the Holy Spirit working through the
• 1:01
  Church. And for us specifically, what's
• 1:03
  interesting is how NS highlights the way this narrative is just
• 1:08
  saturated with the sovereignty of God.
• 1:10
  Oh absolutely. It's everywhere once you know
• 1:12
  what to look for. So here's our mission.
• 1:14
  For this deep dive, we're going to try and strip back some of
• 1:17
  those narrative layers to see the theological skeleton
• 1:20
  underneath. We'll need to act like
• 1:22
  detectives on the dating of the book, then pivot to these
• 1:25
  fascinating parallels between Peter and Paul, and finally get
• 1:28
  into the heavy doctrines sovereignty, soteriology, and
• 1:32
  ecclesiology. It's a worthy study because Ends
• 1:35
  really shows us that Luke is doing what we call biblical
• 1:38
  theology. He's tracing these big themes as
• 1:40
  they unfold in actual history, not just listing them in a
• 1:43
  vacuum. OK, so let's start with that
• 1:45
  detective work to get the theology ends.
• 1:48
  Insists we have to nail down the context, and he starts by
• 1:50
  linking Acts directly to the Gospel of Luke.
• 1:53
  The link is, well, it's undeniable.
• 1:55
  Both books are dedicated to the same person, Theophilus.
• 1:58
  Which means lover of God. Correct.
• 2:00
  SO because of that explicit address and you know all the
• 2:03
  stylistic similarities, the authorship of one basically
• 2:07
  means the authorship of the other.
• 2:08
  If you concede Luke wrote the Gospel, you are historically
• 2:12
  sort of bound to accept he wrote Acts.
• 2:14
  But the real debate, and where Anne spends a lot of energy, is
• 2:18
  the date in modern scholarship. You hear all the time that Acts
• 2:22
  was written, you know, maybe in the 2nd century or the 80s or
• 2:25
  90s AD, long after the events. Long after the fact.
• 2:29
  But ends pushes back on that hard.
• 2:31
  He argues for a very specific and very early date, 8063.
• 2:36
  And his argument is compelling because it's based on what we
• 2:39
  might call the argument from silence.
• 2:41
  He builds his whole case on what Luke does not include in the
• 2:43
  book. On what he leaves out.
• 2:44
  Exactly what's missing is the key.
• 2:47
  OK, so let's walk through that. Why does 8063 make sense based
• 2:50
  on what's not in the text? Well, first just consider how
• 2:53
  the book ends. Acts 28 closes with Paul in
• 2:55
  Rome. Yes, he's under a form of house
• 2:57
  arrest, but it's pretty loose. He's preaching the Kingdom of
• 3:00
  God openly and unhindered. It's an optimistic, almost
• 3:04
  open-ended conclusion. Right.
• 3:06
  It feels like a cliffhanger. You're waiting for the next
• 3:08
  chapter to tell you the verdict of his trial.
• 3:10
  Precisely. You expect to hear what
• 3:12
  happened. Now look at what happened almost
• 3:13
  immediately after 8063. In 8064 you have the Great Fire
• 3:17
  of Rome. The one Nero famously blamed on
• 3:20
  the Christians? Yes.
• 3:21
  And Nero, needing a scapegoat, turns on the Christians.
• 3:25
  This starts a horrific state sponsored persecution.
• 3:29
  So if Luke were writing this document in, say, 8070 or 80,
• 3:34
  looking back at history, it's just inconceivable that he
• 3:39
  wouldn't mention that the Roman government, which he portrays as
• 3:42
  relatively neutral in Acts. Right.
• 3:44
  Almost fair at times. Had become this beast that was
• 3:46
  literally feeding Christians to dogs in the street.
• 3:49
  The tone just doesn't fit. So the whole mood of the book is
• 3:52
  incompatible with a post 8064 reality.
• 3:56
  It is completely incompatible. Then you have the second point,
• 3:59
  the fate of Paul himself. His death, Yeah.
• 4:03
  Paul was executed around 8067. So if Luke is writing a history
• 4:06
  of the early church that focuses almost exclusively on Paul for
• 4:10
  the entire second-half, why would he end the story while
• 4:13
  Paul is essentially just sitting in a waiting room?
• 4:16
  It would be like writing a biography of a president and
• 4:18
  ending it right before their assassination.
• 4:20
  That is a perfect analogy. The absence of his martyrdom is
• 4:23
  maybe the strongest proof that it just hadn't happened yet when
• 4:26
  the ink dried on the manuscript. OK, so the abrupt ending, the
• 4:30
  Nero factor, Paul's death, what's the last piece of
• 4:34
  evidence? The last one is maybe the
• 4:36
  biggest historical event of the 1st century, the fall of
• 4:39
  Jerusalem in 8070. The.
• 4:40
  Destruction of the Temple by the Roman general Titus.
• 4:43
  Right. It was the end of Jewish
• 4:45
  national life as they knew it. It fundamentally changed the
• 4:48
  relationship between Judaism and this new Christian sect forever.
• 4:52
  For Luke to write a history of the church's expansion from
• 4:55
  Jerusalem without even mentioning that Jerusalem had
• 4:57
  been wiped off the map. Yeah, it just defies all logic.
• 5:01
  So ends basically triangulates the date.
• 5:04
  Paul's still alive, Rome hasn't burned yet, and the temple is
• 5:07
  still standing. All signs point to 8063.
• 5:11
  But why is this matter for you? Listening, though, Is this just,
• 5:14
  you know, some academic trivia? No, not at all.
• 5:16
  It's about the integrity of the text.
• 5:18
  It's about its reliability. If Acts is written in 1863, it's
• 5:22
  a report from the front lines. It was written within the
• 5:24
  lifetime of the eyewitnesses who could have disputed it.
• 5:27
  So it's not a legend that developed over 100 years.
• 5:30
  No, it's immediate history. It's journalism in a way, And
• 5:33
  that historical reliability is the foundation for the theology
• 5:37
  he's building. Which brings us to the purpose.
• 5:40
  If Luke is writing this immediate history and suggests
• 5:43
  he has a very specific agenda, he isn't just archiving facts,
• 5:47
  he's making a defense. It's an apologetic thrust.
• 5:50
  You have to remember the political climate.
• 5:52
  The Jews were accusing Christians of being anti law and
• 5:55
  anti temple. The Romans were suspicious of
• 5:57
  any new movement that was proclaiming a king.
• 5:59
  A king other than Caesar. Exactly.
• 6:02
  So Luke is writing to prove that Christianity is not a political
• 6:05
  revolt. He's arguing it's the historic,
• 6:07
  logical fulfillment of Judaism. Do that he has to validate the
• 6:12
  messenger, especially the main messenger of the second-half of
• 6:15
  the book, Paul. And this is one of the most
• 6:17
  striking insights for me and ends his analysis.
• 6:20
  He outlines this structural parallelism between Peter and
• 6:24
  Paul. It is a brilliant literary
• 6:26
  device that accomplishes a huge theological goal.
• 6:29
  You have to remember the early church was fragile.
• 6:32
  You had what you might call the Peter camp, which is mostly
• 6:35
  Jewish believers, and then you had the growing Paul camp, which
• 6:38
  was the Gentiles. There was a very real risk of
• 6:42
  the church splitting into two denominations right at the very
• 6:45
  start. So Luke has to show that Paul
• 6:47
  isn't some kind of secondary B team apostle.
• 6:50
  Correct. He needs to show beyond any
• 6:53
  doubt that Paul carries the exact same Apostolic authority
• 6:56
  as Peter and ends list the miracles.
• 6:58
  And when you see them side by side, it is so clearly
• 7:00
  intentional, it's like a mirror image.
• 7:02
  OK, so let's look at the specifics we had healing the
• 7:05
  lame. Right, Peter heals the lame man
• 7:08
  at the beautiful date in Acts chapter 3.
• 7:10
  A very famous story. And then Paul heals a man who
• 7:13
  was lame from birth at Lystra in Acts chapter 14.
• 7:16
  It's almost a beat for Beat Echo.
• 7:18
  Then there's this this strange proximity healing phenomenon.
• 7:22
  Yeah, this is an interesting one.
• 7:24
  With Peter in Acts 5, people were laying the sick in the
• 7:28
  streets, hoping just his shadow would fall on them and they'd be
• 7:31
  healed. And with Paul?
• 7:32
  With Paul in Acts 19, it says God performed extraordinary
• 7:35
  miracles where handkerchiefs or aprons that had just touched
• 7:38
  Paul's skin were taken to the sick and diseases left them.
• 7:42
  The method is unique in each case, but the power signature,
• 7:45
  the divine authority, is identical.
• 7:47
  You see it in spiritual warfare too.
• 7:49
  Absolutely. Peter casts out unclean spirits
• 7:51
  in X5. Paul does the same very famously
• 7:54
  with the slave girl in Philippi in X16.
• 7:57
  And they both confront sorcerers.
• 7:58
  Yes, Peter confronts Simon Mossy's The Sorcerer in Samaria
• 8:02
  in X8 and then Paul confronts Elimus the Sorcerer in X13 and
• 8:06
  he actually strikes him blind. It's an escalation if.
• 8:09
  Anything Ultimate validator? Yeah, raising the dead.
• 8:12
  The ultimate one. Peter raises Dorcas or Tabitha
• 8:16
  from the dead in Acts Chapter 9, and Paul raises Eutechus in Acts
• 8:20
  20. You remember the young man who
• 8:23
  fell out of the window during Paul's very long sermon.
• 8:26
  I think we can all relate to that a little bit, but the
• 8:28
  implication here, it's not just that they had powers.
• 8:31
  No, no, no. The implication is legitimacy.
• 8:34
  NS argues this is Luke's way of proving there are not 2
• 8:37
  churches, there is one body. Paul bears the exact same divine
• 8:42
  seal as Peter. The Gentile mission is not some
• 8:45
  rogue operation. It is an extension of the same
• 8:47
  Holy Spirit working through the same level of authority.
• 8:50
  Speaking of that spirit and that authority, this brings us to the
• 8:53
  real core of our discussion today.
• 8:56
  And spends a big part of his analysis on the doctrine of God,
• 8:58
  specifically His sovereignty. And he flags a Greek word used
• 9:02
  in Acts chapter 4 that is pretty jarring to modern years.
• 9:06
  It is. It's the prayer of the believers
• 9:08
  after Peter and John are released from custody.
• 9:10
  They've just been threatened by the Sanhedrin, and they begin
• 9:13
  their prayer by addressing God as despita.
• 9:16
  Which gives us the English word despot.
• 9:18
  It does, and in modern English despot is, you know, a negative
• 9:23
  word. It implies A tyrant, someone who
• 9:25
  rules without consent, A dictator.
• 9:27
  But ends clarifies the etymology.
• 9:29
  In the 1st century, despoto just meant a master who holds
• 9:33
  absolute ownership and uncontrolled power.
• 9:35
  Think of a property owner. So why would the early church
• 9:38
  find comfort in calling God a despot?
• 9:41
  Because they were facing earthly despots, they were being
• 9:45
  threatened by the Sanhedrin, by the power of Rome.
• 9:48
  In that moment, they needed to know that the one they prayed to
• 9:50
  was not just some presiding official or a chairman of the
• 9:54
  board. They needed the owner.
• 9:55
  They needed the owner of the universe.
• 9:57
  It signifies total, absolute authority.
• 10:00
  They were basically saying, Lord, you own the chess board on
• 10:03
  which these little tyrants are moving their pieces.
• 10:05
  And ends takes this idea of ownership and applies it
• 10:07
  directly to the crucifixion itself.
• 10:09
  He does a close reading of Acts 2.23.
• 10:12
  This is a cornerstone verse for Reformed theology, especially
• 10:15
  regarding God's sovereignty and human will.
• 10:18
  Peter is preaching at Pentecost and he says Christ was delivered
• 10:21
  up by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God.
• 10:23
  The Greek word for determined purpose there is bool.
• 10:27
  Is that right? Yes.
• 10:28
  BOOL and NS defines it very carefully.
• 10:30
  It's not just a vague wish. It refers to a council or plan
• 10:34
  that is predetermined and inflexible.
• 10:36
  It is a settled resolution. And it's paired with another
• 10:39
  word. Right, it's paired with
• 10:41
  Perizorai, which translates to marking out beforehand.
• 10:46
  So God in eternity past literally drew the boundary
• 10:50
  lines around the event of the cross.
• 10:52
  So this was not God reacting to Judas's betrayal.
• 10:55
  This was not damage control. No, not at all.
• 10:57
  God marked out the boundary lines of the cross before
• 10:59
  history ever began. But, and here's the tension that
• 11:03
  ends as careful to preserve Peter immediately follows that
• 11:06
  statement by saying to the crowd, You, with the help of
• 11:09
  wicked men, put him to death. And this is the part that
• 11:11
  usually confuses people. I mean, if it was the inflexible
• 11:14
  bull of God, how can the crowd be blamed for it?
• 11:17
  That's always the objection, isn't it?
• 11:18
  But ends. And more importantly, the text
• 11:20
  of Acts refuses to grant that objection any ground.
• 11:24
  This is the mystery of what theologians call concurrence.
• 11:28
  Explain that. And the decree belongs to God,
• 11:30
  the action belongs to man, and the two occur concurrently.
• 11:35
  The apostles do not say, well, you were just instruments in a
• 11:38
  divine plan, so you're innocent. They say you are guilty of a
• 11:42
  godless murder. So God is sovereign enough to
• 11:45
  use the free, sinful choices of people to accomplish His holy,
• 11:49
  predetermined ends. Without him being the author of
• 11:53
  their sin. Yes, it prevents us from falling
• 11:55
  into a kind of fatalism. We are responsible agents, yet
• 11:58
  God is the master scriptwriter. That is a Reformed view in a
• 12:01
  nutshell, and N sees this same sovereignty applied to salvation
• 12:05
  itself, specifically when it comes to election.
• 12:08
  He points us straight to Acts 13.48.
• 12:10
  This is the verse about the Gentiles in Antioch hearing
• 12:13
  Paul's preaching. Right.
• 12:14
  And the text says quite plainly, and as many as had been
• 12:17
  appointed to eternal life believed.
• 12:19
  You know, I think the natural human instinct is to want to
• 12:21
  invert that sentence. We wanted to say as many as
• 12:24
  believed God then appointed to eternal life.
• 12:27
  Of course we do. We want the believing to be the
• 12:29
  cause and the appointing to be God's reaction to our choice.
• 12:33
  But ends just points out that the grammar of the Greek simply
• 12:36
  forbids that reading the appointment.
• 12:38
  The passo in Greek is the antecedent cause.
• 12:41
  The belief is the result. So this aligns with the
• 12:44
  Westminster Confessions view. We don't choose God and then he
• 12:48
  sort of ratifies our choice. No, He appoints, and because of
• 12:52
  that appointment, the Spirit regenerates our heart and the
• 12:55
  result is that we believe. Belief is the evidence of
• 12:59
  election, not the cause of it. It certainly places God firmly
• 13:02
  in the seat of authority over salvation, but Ends is careful
• 13:06
  to note that this doesn't mean God is indifferent to the rest
• 13:09
  of the world. He brings up the concept of
• 13:11
  common grace. Yes, this is a good balance.
• 13:13
  He points to Paul's sermons to Pagan audiences, like at Lystra
• 13:16
  in Acts 14 or on Mars Hill in Acts 17.
• 13:19
  Paul doesn't start with the Torah or April with them.
• 13:21
  He starts with nature. With what they can see.
• 13:23
  Exactly. He talks about rain from heaven
• 13:25
  and fruitful seasons. He argues that God has not left
• 13:29
  himself without a witness because he gives life and breath
• 13:32
  to all people. He even says God determines the
• 13:35
  boundaries of nations and their historical eras.
• 13:38
  This is common grace. It's God's general benevolence
• 13:40
  to all his creatures, whether they are elect or not.
• 13:43
  So we have a sovereign Father. But Acts is also deeply
• 13:47
  Christological. It's all about Jesus.
• 13:50
  Ends argues that Luke has a kind of twofold emphasis when it
• 13:53
  comes to Christ. The Crucifixion and the
• 13:56
  resurrection. But the way he frames them is
• 13:58
  distinct from, say, the epistles.
• 14:01
  In the book of Romans, Paul explains the mechanics of the
• 14:03
  cross propitiation justification.
• 14:05
  In Acts, the sermons present the crucifixion primarily as an
• 14:09
  indictment. An indictment?
• 14:10
  What do you mean by that? A legal charge.
• 14:12
  NS lists the recurring phrases the apostles use.
• 14:15
  Things like nailed by godless men shamefully put to death.
• 14:18
  The righteous one was murdered. The apostles are essentially
• 14:21
  serving a warrant to the world. You killed the author of life.
• 14:25
  So if the cross is the indictment, then the
• 14:26
  resurrection is the vindication. That is a very accurate way to
• 14:29
  put it. NS details the theological
• 14:31
  weight Luke places on the resurrection in Acts.
• 14:34
  It's not just a happy ender to a sad story, it's proof.
• 14:38
  Proof of what? Well, first, it's proof of
• 14:41
  prophetic fulfillment. It fulfilled Psalm 16 and Psalm
• 14:43
  2. Second, it's the source of the
• 14:46
  church's power. They proclaimed it with great
• 14:48
  power. Third, it resulted in Christ's
• 14:51
  exaltation to a position of authority.
• 14:53
  But maybe most terrifyingly, it's proof of coming judgement.
• 14:57
  That's from the Mars Hill sermon in Acts 17.
• 14:59
  Is that yes? Paul tells the philosophers that
• 15:02
  God has fixed a day on which he will judge the world, and of
• 15:05
  this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the
• 15:08
  dead. Wow, that completely flips the
• 15:10
  script. We usually think of the empty
• 15:12
  tomb as a comforting image. And it is for believers, but for
• 15:15
  the world. It's the guarantee that the
• 15:17
  Judge is coming back. It establishes Christ's
• 15:20
  authority. He is now exalted.
• 15:22
  And because he is Lord, the message of salvation can't be
• 15:25
  contained. It has to be proclaimed to
• 15:27
  everyone, Jew and Gentile alike. And ends also touches on the
• 15:31
  return of Christ as well. Briefly, yes, the ascension in
• 15:34
  Acts One really defines our expectation.
• 15:36
  The angels tell the disciples Jesus will return in the same
• 15:39
  way. So what does that mean?
• 15:41
  It means it will be visible, physical and personal.
• 15:44
  Peter later speaks of the period of restoration of all things
• 15:48
  that's coming when the king returns.
• 15:49
  So until that restoration, we have the Holy Spirit, and Acts
• 15:53
  is often called the Gospel of the Holy Spirit.
• 15:56
  Ends dives into pneumatology, the doctrine of the Spirit, and
• 16:00
  he goes straight to a story that frankly scares almost everyone.
• 16:03
  Ananias and Sapphira. It is a terrifying narrative for
• 16:06
  sure, but Anne's uses it to secure a vital non negotiable
• 16:10
  doctrine, the deity of the spirit.
• 16:12
  How does that specific incident prove that the Spirit is God?
• 16:16
  It's all in the logic Peter uses in Acts 5 verse three.
• 16:19
  He confronts Ananias and asks, why has Satan filled your heart
• 16:22
  to lie to the Holy Spirit? So the target of the deception
• 16:25
  is the Holy Spirit. OK, but in the very next verse,
• 16:27
  Peter concludes his accusation by saying you have not lied to
• 16:31
  men, but to God. So it's a transitive property
• 16:34
  equation. A lie to the Spirit equals a lie
• 16:37
  to God. Therefore, the Spirit equals
• 16:39
  God. That is the unavoidable
• 16:40
  conclusion, and this just cuts through any heresy that might
• 16:43
  suggest the Spirit is just a force or an energy or an
• 16:46
  emanation from God. He is a person and He is fully
• 16:50
  divine. And his work in the book of Acts
• 16:51
  is very distinct. Ends breaks it down into
• 16:55
  baptizing, filling and leading. And I think people often
• 16:58
  conflate baptizing and filling. How does ends distinguish those
• 17:02
  two? That's a common point of
• 17:04
  confusion in Acts spirit. Baptism is a foundational one
• 17:07
  time event that places the believer into the body of
• 17:09
  Christ. Acts 1.5 predicts it as a future
• 17:12
  event. Acts 11 looks back on Pentecost
• 17:15
  and identifies it as that baptism.
• 17:17
  It's the initiation. And filling.
• 17:19
  Filling, however, is the repeated empowering for a
• 17:22
  specific task, usually bold witness.
• 17:25
  So baptism is the status, filling is the power for
• 17:28
  service. That's a good way to put it.
• 17:30
  You see, in Acts 4.31, believers who are already baptized by the
• 17:33
  Spirit are filled again to speak the Word with boldness.
• 17:36
  It's an experiential endowment of power.
• 17:38
  And then you have leading. Right.
• 17:40
  The spirit in Acts is a strategic commander.
• 17:43
  He's not passive. He directs Philip to the desert
• 17:45
  road to meet the Ethiopian eunuch.
• 17:48
  He physically prevents Paul and his team from entering Asia in
• 17:51
  Acts 16. That section on the Spirit's
• 17:53
  leading really shows that the early church wasn't just sitting
• 17:56
  around brainstorming strategy. They weren't running a
• 17:58
  corporation. No, they were following direct
• 18:00
  orders. They were a supernatural entity
• 18:03
  moving under divine command. This leads us naturally to
• 18:06
  soteriology, the doctrine of salvation in the Reformed
• 18:09
  tradition. We put a lot of weight on Sol
• 18:11
  Lagratia. Grace alone does ends.
• 18:14
  Find that theme to be consistent in the book of Acts.
• 18:16
  He does, and he says the pivot point for the whole early church
• 18:20
  is the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15.
• 18:23
  The question on the table is existential for the church.
• 18:25
  Do Gentiles need to become Jews? Do they need to be circumcised
• 18:29
  and follow the Law of Moses in order to be saved?
• 18:32
  And the answer from the apostles was a hard no.
• 18:35
  An emphatic no. Peter stands up and declares
• 18:38
  that we are saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they
• 18:41
  are. Salvation is by faith alone,
• 18:44
  apart from the works of the law. Ends also highlights a beautiful
• 18:48
  little phrase in Acts 18.27, describing believers as those
• 18:53
  who had believed through grace. That phrase through grace
• 18:57
  connects right back to election, doesn't it?
• 18:59
  Grace isn't just a substance that helps us believe, it's the
• 19:02
  agency that causes belief. Exactly.
• 19:04
  Grace opens the heart like it did for Lydia in Acts 16 so that
• 19:07
  she could believe. But there is a practical
• 19:09
  question here that ends addresses the relationship
• 19:12
  between faith and repentance. Are they 2 separate steps?
• 19:16
  Do I need to clean up my life by repenting and then I can
• 19:18
  believe? Or do I believe and then I start
• 19:21
  to repent? Yeah, this is a very common
• 19:22
  point of confusion in evangelism.
• 19:24
  It is, but NS argues from the text that they're essentially
• 19:27
  synonymous terms. They're two sides of the same
• 19:29
  coin. How so?
• 19:30
  Well, sometimes the apostles say believe.
• 19:32
  Sometimes they say repent. But in Acts 20.21, Paul
• 19:36
  summarizes his entire ministry message as repentance toward God
• 19:40
  and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.
• 19:41
  He holds them together. So you can't have one without
• 19:44
  the other. You can't, you cannot turn
• 19:46
  toward Christ, which is faith, without at the same time turning
• 19:49
  away from your sin and self rule, which is repentance.
• 19:52
  It is a singular motion of the heart.
• 19:54
  To truly believe is to repent. Realizing that solves a lot of
• 19:58
  theological headaches. We're not checking boxes on a
• 20:01
  list. We are reorienting our entire
• 20:04
  allegiance from self to Christ. And finally, we have to talk
• 20:07
  about what all this produces. The Church Ecclesiology ends
• 20:12
  tackles the big question. When did the church actually
• 20:14
  start? Some say it started with
• 20:15
  Abraham, some with John the Baptist.
• 20:17
  Where does ENS land on this? ENS takes what would be
• 20:20
  considered the classic dispensational view, which is
• 20:22
  that the church was born at Pentecost in Acts chapter 2.
• 20:25
  What's the logic for pinning it to that specific date?
• 20:28
  It goes back to the baptism of the Spirit we just discussed.
• 20:30
  First Corinthians 12.13 defines the church as the body formed by
• 20:34
  the baptism of the Spirit. In Acts 1.5, Jesus says that
• 20:38
  baptism is still in the future for the disciples.
• 20:40
  Then in Acts 11, Peter is recounting the story of
• 20:43
  Cornelius and he refers back to Pentecost as the beginning.
• 20:47
  So the Church is a distinct New Testament entity that was formed
• 20:52
  when the Holy Spirit descended at Pentecost.
• 20:54
  And this new entity got organized very quickly.
• 20:57
  I think we have a tendency to view the early church as this
• 21:01
  you know, organic structure, free movement, the kind of
• 21:04
  hippie commune. But Ends points out they had
• 21:06
  officers from the start. They did.
• 21:08
  You had the apostles as the foundation, of course, but as
• 21:10
  they planted local assemblies, they appointed elders.
• 21:13
  The Greek word is presbyteros. And a key observation that ENDS
• 21:17
  makes, which is really vital for Reformed Church government is
• 21:20
  the number of them. Plurality.
• 21:22
  It is always a plurality of elders.
• 21:24
  Acts 14.23 says they appointed elders plural and every church
• 21:29
  singular. The early The church model never
• 21:32
  invested all the spiritual authority in one local celebrity
• 21:35
  pastor. It's a huge.
• 21:36
  Point. It is.
• 21:37
  It was always a shared burden, a shared leadership.
• 21:39
  This model safeguards the Church against tyranny and provides a
• 21:43
  counsel of wisdom for decision making.
• 21:45
  And they likely had deacons to originating from the story in
• 21:48
  Acts 6 to handle the material and logistical needs so the
• 21:52
  elders could focus on prayer and the ministry of the Word.
• 21:56
  So what did this organized church actually do?
• 21:59
  Ends lists 4 main functions. Instruction, fellowship,
• 22:03
  worship, and service. But instruction wasn't just, you
• 22:06
  know, sharing your feelings or life acts.
• 22:09
  Far from it. It was doctrine.
• 22:10
  It was the apostles. Teaching Acts describes a lot of
• 22:13
  disputing and reasoning and arguing.
• 22:16
  They were constantly defending the truth of the resurrection
• 22:18
  against objections. It was intellectually rigorous.
• 22:21
  And fellowship was more than just coffee and doughnuts after
• 22:24
  the service. It was sacrificial and meant
• 22:26
  holding all things in common when there was a need.
• 22:29
  It meant suffering together and then breaking bread, observing
• 22:32
  the Lord's Supper in their homes.
• 22:34
  It was a deep life on life bond. Then you have worship, which the
• 22:38
  text says was marked by reverence and awe, and finally
• 22:41
  service, which was primarily evangelism.
• 22:44
  They were a movement designed to move outward.
• 22:46
  That really is the summary of Acts, isn't it?
• 22:48
  Ends shows. It's a historical apologetic.
• 22:51
  It's a theological treatise on God's absolute sovereignty and
• 22:55
  it is a handbook for how the church is supposed to function
• 22:58
  in the world. It really forces you to look at
• 23:00
  your own local church differently.
• 23:02
  You start to realize you're part of a stream of history that
• 23:05
  started in that upper room, and it's grounded in the very same
• 23:09
  sovereign God. And it's meant to be directed by
• 23:11
  the very same Holy Spirit. Before we wrap up, I want to
• 23:14
  leave our listeners with a provocative thought that ends
• 23:16
  his analysis triggers. He details this relentless
• 23:20
  pattern of rejection all through the book of Acts.
• 23:23
  The Jews in Jerusalem reject the Messiah, the jail, Peter and
• 23:26
  John. They stone Stephen, they chase
• 23:29
  Paul out of town after town after town.
• 23:31
  Yeah, from a human perspective, it looks like a cascade of
• 23:33
  failure. That's the point.
• 23:35
  But here is the paradox. Amidst all that human rejection,
• 23:39
  God's inflexible counsel, His bull, was successfully launching
• 23:44
  the church to the Gentiles. The rejection itself was the
• 23:47
  mechanism of expansion. The closed door in Jerusalem
• 23:50
  forced the window open to the rest of the world.
• 23:52
  Exactly. So for you listening today, if
• 23:55
  you are facing cultural rejection or if it feels like
• 23:58
  doors are slam and shut on the gospel, in your context, look at
• 24:03
  the theology of Acts. Is that rejection a sign of
• 24:05
  failure, or could it be the very tool the Sovereign God is using
• 24:10
  to push his mission to its next unexpected destination?
• 24:14
  Opposition in the book of Acts was very often just the wind and
• 24:16
  the sails of the Church. Something to chew on.
• 24:18
  Thank you for joining us for this deep dive.
• 24:20
  It was a pleasure. Make sure to subscribe to
• 24:22
  Reformed Thinking. We will be back soon to crack
• 24:24
  open another theological treasure.
• 24:26
  Until then, keep thinking.