It is possible that this generation will see the rapture of the Church, that we will be those unique members of the Body that “remain unto the coming of the Lord” (1 Thess. 4:15). It would give us a connection to our brothers and sisters in Christ who lived in the first century. As they saw the beginning of this age, we could see the close.
Church history is helpful to show how men and women in a past generation understood the revelation of God. They may inspire us to devotion and warn us of error, but they cannot add to God’s revelation. For that we must go back to the New Testament.
New Testament assemblies have always been convinced that not only does the New Testament speak authoritatively on matters of salvation and Christian living, it is also a record of what God intended for the practice of the local church. Many believers in assemblies today are attracted to the assembly because it is sound in the fundamental doctrines. Or the people are warm and friendly in Christian care and love. Or there may be an active interest in children or young people. Or the approach to church practice is a good way of doing things. But is it the only right way?
Tensions often exist in assemblies because there is a fundamental difference on this question. Is it a matter of believing only the fundamental doctrines of salvation and leaving each period of history to work out practice based on the evolution of tradition and culture? We believe the New Testament’s record of the early church was God’s way of instructing the church of every period of history. We should do what the New Testament believers did.
If our time is ever recorded in church history, will it observe a striking return to First Century practices? Will it note that our generation was characterized by a steadfast desire to be obedient to the Word of God? Will the historian have ample reason to see that this generation saw itself waiting for the Lord to return and in so doing lived like First Century believers? It can happen.
Here are some observations of what the early church did. (1) The Word of God was the sole authority (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 1 Cor. 14:37). (2) Each local church was governed by a plurality of spiritual elders (Acts 20:17, 28; 1 Tim. 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-11). (3)
Two church ordinances were practiced: the Lord’s Supper (Acts 2:42; 1 Cor. 11:23-34) and baptism (Acts 8:35-39, Rom. 6:1-6). (4) All believers acted as priests (1 Pet. 2:5, 9; Heb. 10:19-22, 13:15). (5) The headship of Christ was recognized (1 Cor. 11:3; Eph 1:22; Col. 1:18). (6) There are distinctive roles of men and women (1 Tim. 2:8-3:12; 1 Cor. 11:1-6; 14:34-35; Rom. 16:1-23). (7) The church was capable of exercising discipline (1 Cor. 5:1-5; 1 Tim. 5:20; Titus 3:10-11; 2 Thess. 3:6; Rom 16:17). (8) Each local assembly was autonomous in the Acts, Epistles, and Revelation. Churches were always addressed on a local basis and never as a collective federation. (9) They engaged in gospel outreach as a collective body (Rom. 1:15; 1 Cor. 15:1; Gal. 1:8; Phil. 1:5, 14; 1 Thess. 1:8). (10) Believers practiced holiness of life (Eph. 1:4; Col. 1:22, 3:12; 2 Tim. 2:19; 1 Pet.1:15-16). (11) They met in the name of the Lord Jesus (Mt. 18:20; 1 Cor. 1:10-16). (12) Only genuine believers were accepted into fellowship (Acts 2:41). (13) They met for collective prayer (Acts 2:42; 4:24-31; 1 Tim. 1:3-4; 2:1, 12). (14) They met for teaching (Acts 2:42; 1 Tim. 4:11-16; Eph. 4:11-24; Titus 2:1). (15) They contributed to the financial needs of fellow believers and Christian work and workers (1 Tim. 6:17-19; Philemon 18-19; 1 Cor. 9:1-15; 2 Cor. 9; Phil. 4:18-19). (16) The ministry of the Holy Spirit was depended on (Eph. 2:22; Jn. 16:13; Acts 6; Acts 20:28, and several other references). (17) The Lordship of Christ was assumed (Phil. 2:1-11 and many others).
The first century church and the last century church–will there be a difference? How fitting to greet the Lord at His coming with the church having returned home. Let’s make a little church history of our own.