On Apostolic Works

Acts 20:9 "...there sat in a window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep: and as Paul was long preaching, he sunk down with sleep, and fell down from the third loft, and was taken up dead. 10 And Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing him said, Trouble not yourselves; for his life is in him. 12 And they brought the young man alive, and were not a little comforted."

There are two divergent opinions regarding the Book of Acts: 1) That  there were miracles designed by God to kick-start the newly growing church, or 2) that early church practices were the foundation of what the church was to be forever. Because of two different opinions we have two extreme beliefs: 1) the modern day Apostolic Churches and 2) the traditional churches, some of which are evangelical and others traditional.  Therefore, within the Christian faith there are three faiths in one, sort of a "Holy Affinity" where Christians readily come to each and fight to remain there!

I find no scripture which "proves" either proposition 1 nor 2! Therefore, neither opinion is right and neither is wrong. God is a mystery and he has his reasons. Because this issue is divisive means that what the apostles did was truth, but Satan has distorted our understanding for his own purposes. The safe position, so as not to grieve the Holy Spirit, is to say "That's not for me to know and claiming secret knowledge is prideful."

Those who take the latter position are "Full Gospel Churches". Their contention is that others teach only half the gospel and that the Holy Ghost is ignored. Because even saying the words "Holy Ghost" makes traditionalists fear being called Pentecostals, they use the  name "Holy Spirit", which sounds more scientific and less eerie!  (A video on this topic is forthcoming this week on youtube.com).

Full Gospel churches focus on the Holy Ghost at the expense of Jesus. Traditional churches neglect the Holy Ghost because the focus is rightfully to be on Jesus. However, the focus belongs to God who is both, thus all three! It was Jesus the man who is God who died for us, so it's he who is the Way! His spirit remains with mankind and is the Ghost of Jesus because a ghost belongs only to whom was at one time flesh!  The man Jesus' purpose was the be the atonement for sins and provide salvation to mankind, and the Holy Spirit's role is to "comfort" us in the absence of Jesus!

Immediately after the crucifixion of Jesus doubt arose. God did special things to assure the disciples to continue in their faith. Because Jesus was gone in body and because of extreme ridicule and persecution, it is probable that God did special things to propagate the faith and comfort those in doubt. What he did was to use the Holy Ghost to do miracles. We all agree that the gift of tongues was a miracle as was snake handling and even raising from the dead.

Full Gospel churches teach that "speaking in tongues" is evidence of the Holy Ghost and that traditional churches either aren't of Christ or need something else!  Traditional churches believe that adding something else to grace they already have is heretical. The broad contention is that Christians are filled with the Holy Ghost when they are born-again, and nearly as prevalent is that the Holy Ghost comes with baptism. For me, I won't put God in Herrin's box; he does what he wills to do however he chooses to do it! My God has almighty power and he is not a method nor a process. He is God!

Full Gospel Churches would say that what occurred in the Acts of the Apostles still happen today. The main contention is that men still speak in what they call "unknown tongues". Some believe that faithful Christians are to handle snakes because the apostles proclaimed that great of faith. Using that argument leads to the topic at hand! Where are the Full Gospel preachers who raise men from the dead?

If indeed we use the Acts of the Apostles to fuel the doctrine of modern-day speaking in tongues, to be a valid argument those same Full Gospel preachers must revive people from death!

Obviously, we all agree that the Holy Spirit/Ghost is still with mankind, providing hope and comfort. The difference is in how he works, when he fills, how he fills, and by how much Christians are filled; and even possibly whether the Holy Spirit comes and goes.

All these questions are contentions and contentious. Just as baptism's mode, timing, method, position, depth, and times immersed divided 1500's Christians, the gifts of the Holy Spirit and miracles divide Christians today. Scripture leads me to view the "special case" position for a new church. I can't dictate to anyone that my position is by divine authority, but that's what I'm inspired to believe. On the other hand those of opposite doctrine believe they too are inspired by God and they are the ones who are right. God doesn't inspire different people to opposing faiths, so one or both camps are wrong and just fail to understand what God wills for us to understand.

Believe me when I say "If God has a purpose for my preacher to raise someone from the dead, my preacher will have that ability even if no one else does!"  That's having sincere faith in almighty God!

On the other hand if my preacher raised someone from the dead most would still not believe! The same was true in Paul's time, but enough believed to make the church grow. People are doubters! The official word is "agnostic" because they are skeptical about God and his almighty power. As the rich man was informed by Jesus about his brothers:

Luke 16:31 "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

Especially now, since modern science has the ability to revive those if caught soon enough, it's still a work of God, but it's the doctor who gets the credit! Raising someone from the dead is commonplace within the medical community, but not the church. Hence, the faith is in the doctors, not God! Man's unbelief is so firm that even the raising of the dead is ineffectual! Why don't preachers do that? Because if preachers revived them, it would merely appear to be fraud in the eyes of skeptics!

The lesson here is that faith is not dependent on miracles. Faith is examining the evidence about Jesus and asking the question "Is he who he says he is and did he do for us what he said that he was going to do?" If you believe that you are enlightened and as such, are born again a new creation!  That's by faith!

If you demand "proof" as did the Jews, your faith is weak. If it takes raising a person from the dead to convince you that Jesus is the Way, then your faith is weak! If it takes speaking in tongues to convince you that you are saved, then your faith is weak! "Works" are things we do to try to save ourselves. That isn't going to happen because we don't have the power to do that! It's by faith in Jesus that we're saved, and by faith we believe.  The necessity for "proof" means that the person must have doubts. My faith is stronger than that!

Perhaps the question is not "Who is right?", but "Who has the most faith?"

If God raised someone from the dead that's good! For me to believe in Jesus, it's only necessary for me to believe that he rose from the dead. Anyone else to be raised from the dead doesn't assure my own salvation. Likewise, with speaking in tongues.  I don't need that to believe!

Because I don't have this overpowering pride to say "My doctrine is always right and yours if wrong!", I have enough meekness to add "If you need speaking in tongues before you believe, then maybe you speak in tongues!" If God wants you to raise people from the dead or speak in tongues he can do that! However, with the rich man, he said for his family, it's an effort in futility!

This commentary is as objective, I feel, that I can be. Because I don't want to grieve the Holy Ghost nor exhibit excessive pride, I must concede: "Maybe I'm wrong!", but for your own humility you should also admit "Maybe you are wrong!"  Pride gets in our way and discord results.

If God wills that I raise people from the dead or speak in tongues, I'm ready and waiting to do his will. That's what submission is all about.