Beröer Suche

Schlagwort: Congregation

  • The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 8

    The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 8

    By Christian

    In the last two parts of this series, we will deal with the consequences of wanting to shape our Zoom community ‚exactly like the first Christians‘. In the last part, we had already covered these topics:

    • ‚They devoted themselves to the apostles‘ teaching‘
    • ‚Sharing a meal together‘
    • ‚Breaking bread together‘
    • Baptism
    • Finances, donations, property
    • Apostles, overseers, elders, deacons
    • Women as overseers, elders and deacons

    I would like to take up three further points that pose an enormous challenge for a Zoom community, even more so than for others.

    Doctrines

    What was it like when the first congregation in Jerusalem was founded? Well, actually there was no such moment. At least not like in other congregations that were founded by missionaries like Paul. Was it clear from the beginning what everyone had to believe? Or to put it another way: Was there a list of doctrines that ‚we in this congregation‘ believe? Do these considerations and questions seem strange to you? That’s perfectly fine, because the historical development was different. The first disciples all came from the Jewish religion. And whichever direction they leaned, they had a common foundation. To this were added the teachings of Jesus Christ and the conviction that he had risen from the dead. There was not much more when the Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost. What was the central message? “Philip went to a city in Samaria and proclaimed the Messiah Jesus.” (Acts 8:5 NEÜ) And shortly thereafter: ‘Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told the Ethiopian the good news about Jesus.’ (Acts 8:35 NEÜ) What else did he have to learn and accept as binding beliefs before he was baptized? “As they traveled along the road, they came to some water. ‚There is water here,‘ said the eunuch, ’so why can’t I be baptized?’” (Acts 8:36 NEÜ). Nothing, because we read that he was baptized.

    Why did I mention this? For one thing, it shows us the basic teachings of the first congregations. The scriptures (what is today called the Old Testament) and the gospel of Jesus. Were details asked about or difficult theological questions? Was there a fixed creed? It is interesting here that Acts 8:36,37 is rendered differently in different translations:

    As they traveled along the road, they came to some water. “There is water here,” said the eunuch, “what stands in the way of my baptism?”

    Footnote: Later manuscripts add: “If you believe with all your heart,” Philip said, “you may be baptized.” – “Yes,” said the Ethiopian, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” (This question and answer corresponded to the practice of the early church and probably came from there into some manuscripts.)

    Acts 8:36,37 NEÜ

    Over time, central doctrines of the faith were formalized so that they could be learned by heart. Writings such as the Didaché served as instruction after baptism. But there were already oral creeds that found their way into the text of the New Testament:

    For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

    1 Corinthians 15:3-7 NIV

    Beyond all question, the mystery from which true godliness springs is great:

    He appeared in the flesh,
    was vindicated by the Spirit,
    was seen by angels,
    was preached among the nations,
    was believed on in the world,
    was taken up in glory.

    1 Timothy 3:16 NIV

    Who, being in very nature a God,
    did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
    rather, he made himself nothing
    by taking the very nature b of a servant,
    being made in human likeness.
    And being found in appearance as a man,
    he humbled himself
    by becoming obedient to death —
    even death on a cross!
    Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
    and gave him the name that is above every name,
    that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
    in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
    and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
    to the glory of God the Father.

    Philippians 2:6-11 NIV

    In the last two quotations, the text of the New Testament itself uses an interesting verse form that facilitates memorization and repetition in the congregations. And if we think of the instructions in Acts 15, they were also very concise.

    Now compare that with your Zoom congregation or one you know. Do they think they are doing everything the way the first century congregation did? And in terms of beliefs, are they doing it the way we just read about? Then maybe you should have thoughts like those quoted in the Bible texts, right? Compare it, for example, with this description of a Zoom congregation:

    We are non-Trinitarian Christians.

    Our beliefs are: [I have left out the detailed sub-points]:
    There is only one true God, the Father of all, the Creator of all.
    Jesus is our Lord, King and only Leader.
    The Holy Spirit is used by God to accomplish His will.
    The Bible is God’s inspired word.
    The dead are non-existent; the hope for the dead is resurrection.
    Jesus Christ came to open the way for believers to become God’s children.
    Satan (also known as the devil) was a son of God’s angels before he sinned.
    There is only one Christian hope and only one Christian baptism.

    A Zoom Congregation’s Own Description of Its Core Beliefs

    Do you see the difference? As I said at the beginning of this series, the consequences only really become apparent when you look closely at how it is lived in practice.

    If you ask someone from this Zoom congregation about who is allowed to attend their meetings, you will probably get an answer like, “Anyone can come to our meetings.” And why is it mentioned right away that they are “non-Trinitarian Christians”? Can someone who only agrees with the fundamental teachings that we have just read in the creeds in the New Testament participate repeatedly, but otherwise has different views? What if the person repeatedly comments on texts and expresses an opinion that corresponds to a Trinitarian doctrine? Will he then be allowed to continue to participate in the Lord’s Supper or even remain?

    Now we must not make it easy for ourselves by telling ourselves that the person can go elsewhere. For if the members of the Zoom congregation are convinced that they are led by the Holy Spirit and that their views are part of biblical truth – and the doctrine of the Trinity is not – do we not then exclude the person from the ‚true‘ Christian congregation?

    Who then has established these teachings? The description suggests that everyone is of the same conviction. But did it come about that a group of people unanimously came to this conclusion through the Holy Spirit (as described in Acts 15)? Or did the founder of this Zoom congregation first proclaim his views and then only those who thought similarly joined him? And later it is made clear that in the future only those who agree with certain views are welcome?

    “Christian, aren’t you overdoing it a bit now? Then let them stay in their Zoom congregation and the others in their own. What’s the problem?” Coming right up. We look further into the future. In the non-Trinitarian Zoom congregation, someone expresses the thought that Jesus was a human being and was taken up by God because of his faithfulness to him. ‘No, absolutely not,’ we hear, ”Jesus came from heaven.” Can both views be tolerated? Or does one or the other view also become part of the belief system? Well then, let them give it a rest and divide into two Zoom congregations… And don’t say history doesn’t repeat itself. Isn’t that exactly what happened in the first centuries?

    Is this the model for first-century congregations, or the beginning of the development of the first congregation in Jerusalem into the church? Is it not becoming clear, at the latest now, that we are automatically running into the same problems as the congregations in the first centuries after Christ? Perhaps we should also compare the origin and development of one of the numerous Christian movements in the 19th century. Then we can see even better the mechanisms and circumstances that have been repeated over and over again.

    Who belongs to the Zoom Congregation?

    The question of which teachings are or are not “permissible” also raises another point: Who belongs to the congregation and who does not? Who decides whether and when to exclude someone from the meetings?

    Imagine that at some point, someone starts mentioning more and more often that the relevant Bible texts do in fact speak in favor of the Trinity. Or that women in the Zoom congregation should not pray in public. Or that heaven is not the hope for Christians. Or… you’re sure to come up with more.

    Is it then already a ’sin‘ that is to be dealt with according to Jesus‘ words in Matthew 18? Some say no, and I will address this in the next section. So how did the first-century congregations proceed? I mean, practically, not in the sense of advice and instructions in a letter from Paul or something. Although one should also ask oneself whether one is not putting oneself on a par with a church planter and missionary like Paul when quoting such texts to oneself.

    Does the Zoom Congregation decide then? By majority vote? Absolute or relative majority? And who actually ‚belongs‘ to the Zoom Congregation? Or does the moderator decide alone? If there were elders and overseers, then maybe they? Or is it better to ask the founder of the Zoom Congregation?

    Some have brought up the idea of some kind of ‚domiciliary right‘: whoever organizes the Zoom meeting has the domiciliary right, so to speak, and can decide.

    Good. So that would correspond to the congregation in Rome in the 1st century, which met in the house of Priscilla and her husband Aquila, according to Romans 16:3-5. This would give them the ‚domestic authority‘ to decide who could come and who could not. If the apostle Paul were to write about this in a letter or were even present, would his words only have an advisory function, or? After all, he does not have the authority over the household. So they could have turned Paul out of their house as well – their house. It’s interesting to see what happens when you think through such ideas in concrete terms.

    In other areas, this may be understandable. Take a YouTube channel, for example. If someone feels that it is actually his or her channel and her or she is identified with it, then he or she may decide to delete posts that do not correspond to their views. Or posts from someone who is no longer actually part of the Zoom congregation or no longer wants to be. Although, what does that have to do with the content? Never mind, that’s still understandable.

    But how is that with a Zoom congregation? You can’t think on the one hand that the Zoom congregation is a congregation like the first-century one, but at the same time claim ‚domiciliary rights‘ for yourself, as if you have invited guests into your living room.

    If this matter is complicated, then how much more so when it comes to ’sinners’…

    Dealing with ’sinners‘

    Let us return to the question of how to deal with ’sinners‘. According to some, Jesus‘ words in Matthew 18 are the only relevant statement here. Let us read them in context:

    “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector. “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be e bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be f loosed in heaven. “Again, truly I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything they ask for, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”

    Matthew 18:15-20 NEÜ

    I deliberately quoted the second part from verse 18 as context, because there are many very different interpretations of it. And Jesus’s reference to being with his disciples when even two or three come together. So not an easy text if you want to ‚do it exactly as in the 1st century‘. When does a brother ’sin‘ according to Jesus‘ words? Jesus does not elaborate on this. So is that decided in the Zoom congregation? Each person for themselves? Well, then some might think that this is a sin and others don’t? Do you then start to make a list… Well, but I don’t want to go into that at all. I also marked another sentence.

    Even if you ignore the ‚little sins‘ of imperfect people – although Jesus makes no distinction here – then sooner or later there will be someone in a Zoom congregation who does something that quite a few people consider a sin. Then ‚bring the matter before the congregation‘, Jesus says. How should I imagine that in the Zoom congregation? If you claim to do it exactly as in the 1st century or as Jesus said, you would have to do it, wouldn’t you? Who then belongs to the ‚congregation‘? All those who are in the Zoom meeting more or less regularly? Are others allowed to join at this time? Or do you prevent that? Is video recording allowed? Feel free to think about this for a while and then reflect on the statement to ‚do it exactly as in the 1st century‘. If you don’t even know how it was done in the 1st century.

    I think it has become clear that due to the past 2000 years, the different culture and today’s technology, there are new questions and challenges that did not exist back then. But if there can be no concrete derivation from the congregations in the 1st century, then the whole idea of doing it ‚exactly as in the 1st century‘ does not make much sense, does it?

    Conclusion

    As we have seen, it is not possible to ‚do exactly as the first-century church did‘, because the one church did not exist. And the different congregations did not always and everywhere do everything the same way. That would not have made sense either, because the context and circumstances were different and changed.

    Why did we even bother with this claim then? Because the claim “we do it like the congregation of the early Christians” often carries other ulterior motives: Because we do it like the early Christians, we do it right. Emphasis on right. Or also: Because we do it like the early Christians, we do it right. Emphasis on ‚we‘. And that implies that ‚the others‘ are not doing it right. And that creates a boundary in space that strengthens the sense of ‚us‘, but does not necessarily have a biblical basis. And at some point, one might even speak (again) of ‚true‘ and ‚false‘ religion.

    This raises the question of whether, two thousand years later in the internet age, in countries where Christian religions are widespread or predominant, the context is not so different from the first century that the scant information we have cannot be directly applied to our situation. Especially since there is no instruction for this in the New Testament.

    Does it even make sense to try to do it ‚exactly like the congregation of the early Christians‘? Didn’t the believers in the first century and in the time after that have to think again and again about how to organize themselves? Of course. Because if you read the New Testament, as we have done in this series, you will notice that they were supported by the Holy Spirit, but he did not dictate or inspire every little detail. And actually, Jesus leads his church. And sometimes he also used angels for this. The Holy Spirit came into play when it went beyond what they could have done themselves. Peter would never have come up with the idea of baptizing the Gentiles on his own. He would never have taken it upon himself, as his responses to his vision show. And Paul was determined to evangelize in a certain area, until he was clearly directed in a different direction in a nocturnal vision. But otherwise, they had to use what their Creator had given them: their minds.

    In any case, it can’t hurt to broaden your view to include the accounts of the believers in the New Testament and also in the Old Testament. And there is also a lot to be learned from the history of the disciples and the Christians up to the early churches. Yes, even from the further historical development. And the movements that emerged in the 19th century. Ultimately, you will find that the New Testament is not a manual for organizing the meeting. Pretty soon you are faced with questions and decisions, as have all followers of Christ over the centuries. And there are no easy and clear answers in the New Testament. Since our context today is quite different – especially in the case of a Zoom congregation – we need to rethink things. In doing so, we should learn from the decisions and developments of the past. 

  • The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 7

    The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 7

    By Christian

    After examining the text of the New Testament in relation to the congregations of the 1st century and considering the historical context in the first six parts of this series, we can now ask ourselves whether the claim that “we do it the same way as the congregations of the 1st century” can be implemented at all. Apart from the fact that we have already recognized from the scriptures that there was not ‚the one congregation‘.

    So, after the sections “Text” and “Context”, we are now dealing with the “Consequences”.

    Consequences

    What is perhaps not so often considered are the consequences of actually trying to implement the pattern of the 1st century – or rather the patterns.

    Let us recall Acts 2:41-47. We had read about the beginnings of the Jerusalem congregation: (1) they devoted themselves to the apostles‘ teaching; (2) they broke bread (the Lord’s Supper, Eucharist); (3) they shared their meals together; (4) they prayed together; (5) they shared everything in common. And later there were some changes in the congregations.

    Now let’s see which of these are actually implemented in a Zoom congregation.

    “They devoted themselves to the apostles‘ teaching.”

    “We do that too, of course,” someone might think. But let’s note that in this quote from Acts, the 11 faithful apostles were meant. But you will probably also read the letters of Paul, James or Jude, won’t you? But we won’t quibble. At least as a goal in terms of doctrine, we’ll let that pass.

    “Eating together”

    Those who say that they do it exactly as the first-century congregation might still be able to implement that in their home groups. For the Zoom congregation, however, it is likely to be more difficult and is therefore hardly ever done: having meals together. So there we have the first deviation from ‚the pattern of the 1st century‘.

    “Breaking bread together”

    This Lord’s Supper in remembrance of Jesus‘ last supper was actually part of the meal eaten together, and so we have the same problem. But for a Zoom congregation, it is even more difficult. Not because of the physical separation. And because you can hardly pass around a common cup and the same bread. But because of those present. Who is allowed to be there and take of the bread and wine? Only the baptized? Or did other requirements have to be met? The New Testament text does not say this clearly. But the Didaché clearly states that only those baptized in the name of Jesus may eat. Could someone who was new to the group participate in the shared meal and partake of the bread and wine? Or were they just supposed to watch? What do you do when people regularly attend your Zoom congregation for the first time? Do you have ‚observers‘ like the Jehovah’s Witnesses? Or are only ‚participants‘ allowed?

    Then, of course, there are the questions of what kind of bread and wine should be used. The New Testament says nothing about this. And how does your Zoom congregation do it? Like the congregations in the 1st century? Whatever suggestions or rules there are, they cannot be traced back to the congregation in the 1st century on the basis of the text.

    Baptism

    Are people being baptized in your Zoom congregation? And if so, by whom? Can anyone do it, or only ‚elders‘? The New Testament reports don’t say much, but as with John the Baptist, it was done at a body of water and thus in public. The Didachḕ did provide clear instructions regarding the water. And one should fast beforehand. That’s what congregations did in the 1st century. Well, ‚we do it exactly as in the 1st century’… Then you should ask about the water and the fasting next time.

    Did anyone in the first century get baptized again because they felt their baptism was invalid? What was baptism about in the first place? “What stands in the way of my baptism?” asks the Ethiopian in Acts 8. What did he know and why did he want to be baptized? What does the text say? You might be surprised. And that’s why we’ll come back to this text later.

    Should a baptism be broadcast worldwide to Zoom congregations via the internet? Remember what you read about it in the New Testament: Who baptized? And what did Paul say on the subject in his first letter to the Corinthians? “I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one can say that you were baptized in my name.” So if someone has founded a Zoom congregation or congregations or is known in them, it might be a sign of wisdom to consider whether to baptize others yourself and also broadcast this worldwide. Which of course was not possible at all in the 1st century, which brings us back to the topic: “We do it exactly the same way as…”

    And let us recall the words of Paul, which we had already read in the second part of the series:

    Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

    1 Corinthians 1:13-17 NIV

    Financing, donations, personal property

    There were and are groups in which members are encouraged to hand over all personal property to the community. Supposedly, this is how the first community in Jerusalem functioned in its early days. However, this is not the case in most Zoom congregations or home groups. And it was not the case in the other communities in the first century either. So either one adheres to the one or the other congregation in the 1st century.

    But how do you handle donations in your group? In the New Testament, we read that Paul was supposed to think of the poor – the poor in Jerusalem. And how donations were organized for these people in need in Judea. Because they had become impoverished due to their generosity after Pentecost, persecution or natural disasters. And that Paul himself worked in Ephesus and wanted nothing for himself. He only accepted support in exceptional cases.

    So what should we think of donations for other purposes? If we don’t even know the exact reason? Only vaguely for the ‚promotion of the activity‘? Or for trips to other people in the group? Of course, everyone can do it as they want. If the donations are mainly for that and not for the poor, does that still fit with the 1st-century model? We are considering this in view of the statement: “We do it the same way as the first-century congregation did”.

    But even in the 1st century, the support of traveling preachers (apostles; today we would rather call them missionaries) must have been abused frequently. Otherwise it would not have been mentioned so explicitly in the Didachḕ, as we read in the third part: “Every apostle who comes to you is to be received as the Lord; but he is not to stay longer than one day; if necessary, two days; but if he stays three days, he is a false prophet.” As a Jehovah’s Witness, I should have read this to a circuit or regional overseer earlier…

    Apostles, overseers, elders, deacons

    I’ll ask it straight out: Are there… apostles in your Zoom congregation? Overseers, elders, deacons? If they don’t exist, then that doesn’t correspond to the congregations in the 1st century. The text in the New Testament is unequivocal. And if they do exist, how are they appointed? By ‚laying on of hands‘ by the apostles? Hardly, because they have been dead for a long time. Or ‚by holy spirit‘? In what way? Or are elders elected by the congregation? This is where it gets quite difficult, because we find nothing in the New Testament about this after the death of the apostles (the original ones and those like Paul and Barnabas).

    I will not go into this part in any more detail, because the Zoom congregations and house churches of which I am aware do not follow the example of the 1st century in this regard. They want to be organized differently. Everyone should be equal – perhaps also because of painful experiences in a religion to which they previously belonged.

    Women as overseers, elders and deacons

    This is an exciting topic because there are still heated discussions among scholars and lay people as to whether women are allowed to be overseers, elders and deacons. And how the relevant texts are to be understood. Don’t think for a moment that we can clear this up in a few sentences here. This topic shows, however, that it is not so easy to do it exactly as in the 1st century if you don’t know for sure how it was handled back then. And possibly even differently due to the cultural and historical context.

    Besides, the topic is interesting because you can’t just ignore it – unless there are only men in the zoom community, which would be rather unusual… And certainly not in line with first-century congregations!

    What if women are present, and some have the understanding that women may be overseers or pray, but others are convinced of the opposite? What does the Zoom congregation do then? Do some have to accept the decision in favor of the other view? Who decides then? The majority of those present, i.e. those who are regularly present or those who happen to be present? Or the overseers? If there are any overseers or elders at all, which is often not the case.

    Or was it the person who founded the Zoom congregation? Or moderated? That person has the ‚right to decide who may enter the house‘, doesn’t he? So then Priska and her husband Aquila would have had the right to decide who may enter the meeting in their house (according to Romans 16:3-5)? And they decided what would be taught and whether women would be allowed to pray, etc.? I understand that someone who organizes a Zoom meeting initially sees it as an invitation to their living room. But then it is not a congregation like the disciples in the first century.

    But these are by no means all the challenges faced when growing a Zoom community. A few more and a conclusion will follow in the next and final episode.

  • The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 6

    The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 6

    Von Christian

    After taking a look at both the historical and social context in the last episode, we wanted to at least look at an important writing from the first century that was considered useful and even part of the biblical canon, but was ultimately not included in the final canon.

    The Didachḕ

    The Didachḕ [Διδαχὴ τῶν δώδεκα ἀποστόλων Didaché tõn dṓdeka apostól ōn, ‚Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles‘), consists of a catechism (moral teaching), a divine service order and a “small apocalypse” and was written around 100-110 AD. Initially it was counted among the canonical writings, but later it was no longer.

    The work is divided into 16 chapters, each with three sections and a conclusio.

    • Chapters 1–6: Overview of Christian ethics in two ways: the way of life and death
    • Chapters 7–10: Liturgy of the Sacraments (Baptism, Eucharist, Lent/Fasting, Prayer)
    • Chapters 11–15: disciplinary instructions, church order (itinerant teachers, prophets, divine service, church elections)
    • Chapter 16: Final Chapter: Eschatology

    Some quotations from it (German translation from the ‚Library of the Church Fathers‚ at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland):

    5: Do not be like one who stretches out his hands to receive, but with closed hands refuses to give. If you have something in your hands, give it as an atonement for your sins.

    7: 1. Regarding baptism, do it this way: If you have said all of the above, “baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” in running water. 2. But if you don’t have running water, then baptize in any other water; if you can’t do it in cold water, do it in warm. 3. If you have neither, then pour water three times over the head “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” 4. Before baptism, let the baptizer, the person being baptized, and whoever else can fast; let the person being baptized fast for a day or two beforehand.

    9: Concerning the Eucharist, hold it thus: 2. First, concerning the cup: We thank Thee, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David Thy servant, whom Thou didst make known to us through Jesus, Thy servant; to Thee be honor forever. 3. And concerning the broken bread: We thank You, our Father, for the life and knowledge that You have made known to us through Jesus, Your servant; to You be the glory forever and ever. 4. As this broken bread was scattered upon the mountains and gathered together became one, so may Your congregation be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Your kingdom; because Yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever and ever. 5. But no one may eat or drink of your Eucharist unless they have been baptized in the name of the Lord. For the Lord has also said about this: “Do not give what is holy to dogs.”

    11: As for the apostles and prophets, hold them in high regard in accordance with the command of the gospel. 4. Every apostle who comes to you is to be received as the Lord; 5. but he is not to stay longer than one day; if necessity, then for a second; but if he tarry three days, then is he a false prophet. 6. And if the apostle depart, let him take with him only bread so long as he cometh again; but if he seek money, he is a false prophet. … 12. But if anyone says in the spirit, ‚Give me money or something else,‘ do not listen to him; but if he asks for gifts for others in need, no one shall judge him.

    15: 1. Choose for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men who are mild and free from greed, who love the truth and are tested; for they are the ones who, for you, provide the (holy) service of the prophets and teachers.

    Didachḕ Chapter 5:5,6; Chapter 7; Chapter 9; Chapter 11, Chapter 15

    You can already see where the journey is headed here. If there are any traditional instructions from Jesus in the New Testament at all, such as those regarding baptism, then they are very brief. And so many questions remain unanswered. And things that need to be decided. And the congregations began to record and pass on certain decisions. Be it in terms of doctrine or procedure. After all, you don’t want to decide one way today and differently tomorrow, do you? And we will see exactly this development again when we look at how it works in a Zoom congregation today.

  • The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 5

    The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 5

    Von Christian

    In the previous episodes, we had begun to examine the text of the New Testament in relation to the structure of the congregations. Always with the claim in mind: “We are doing exactly as the Christians in the 1st century did”.

    In doing so, we touched on the organization of the congregations and the topic of donations, as well as baptism and peaceful coexistence. We could look at other specific aspects, but that would make this a rather long series. Let’s rather take a look at the historical context of what we have read so far.

    The historical context

    In fact, the congregations did not arise in a vacuum, but in very specific historical contexts with very specific needs of the disciples. Let us take a closer look at this context and then ask ourselves whether we have the same needs today and whether we can simply transfer everything to our own situation.

    We often tend to see the history of the followers of Jesus in the first century as a homogenous thing – the first-century congregation. As if there was only ‚the one congregation‘ in the first century that lived this way or that. The following graphic is intended to show us some important aspects.

    The development over time

    At the top, I have drawn ‚generations‘ of 40 years each. This helps us to get a better sense of how much time really passed back then. Think about it in terms of ‚me‘, ‚my father/mother‘, ‚my grandfather/grandmother‘, ‚my children‘ and ‚my grandchildren‘. How much do you know about your grandparents? What did they tell you about their youth? For most of the followers of Jesus in the first century, the events in the life of Jesus were at best the accounts of the grandparents or great-grandparents‘ generation. And many were later pagans whose parents and even grandparents had not heard of Jesus, let alone met him.

    Perhaps we also have the idealistic idea of ‚the congregation in Jerusalem‘ in mind. This may be because we can read the texts in the New Testament in minutes or a few hours. We completely lack a sense of the many years that pass in the accounts. And we have virtually no account of the second part of the first century in the New Testament.

    An apostle Peter, James, the brother of Jesus, or an apostle Paul were no longer alive less than three decades after Jesus‘ death! It would be as if Jesus had been around in the early 1990s and today Peter, James, Paul and others had passed away.

    And what happened in the time in between? Perhaps as early as a year after Jesus‘ death, Stephen was stoned and the congregation in Jerusalem was scattered. That would have been even before the year 2000.

    The ‚Council at Jerusalem‘ (Acts 15) would have been as early as 2010, and in a few years the Temple and Jerusalem will be destroyed. Then those in Jerusalem and Judea will have to flee. But before that, persecution by the world power of Rome has already begun.

    Meanwhile, the children and grandchildren have grown up and Jesus still has not returned. The gospel has been proclaimed throughout the Roman Empire, as far as Rome and beyond.

    Perhaps we are now aware of the changes that have taken place during this time and how ‚the congregation‘ has changed dramatically in the first century.

    It would also be interesting to take a closer look at how other apostles (missionaries) and overseers were appointed after the 12 apostles. That is, after the time when these apostles still laid their hands on them. And was there already monepiscopacy in Rome, that is, the leadership of the congregation by a bishop? In the first two centuries, it cannot be said with certainty when and where there was leadership by a group of elders and when one person in particular took the lead and was called a bishop.

    Could it be that we have an idealized notion of ‚the congregation‘ in the first century? One that never existed in this form in early Christianity? Incidentally, the German term Urchristentum – meaning ‚early Christianity‘ – has only been used in German-language literature since around 1770 (see Wikipedia German Urchristentum, English ).

    And we have not yet discussed the gradual detachment of Jesus‘ Jewish disciples from their religion, culture and environment.

    The social context

    The structure and changes in the congregations of followers of Christ in the first century must also be viewed in their social context. I would like to recall just a few facts:

    • Initially, the congregation in Jerusalem consisted only of Jews, and they were also initially perceived as such by others. It was only after some time that they could no longer go to the synagogues or the temple. In Acts 21:26, we read that Paul went with others to the temple in Jerusalem. It was only seven days later that he was seen and arrested in the temple by Jews from the province of Asia.
    • In the beginning, the 11 apostles personally chosen by Jesus were the most authoritative figures when it came to teaching about Jesus. Then James, the brother of Jesus, also appeared. As the congregation in Jerusalem grew and the gospel spread to other congregations, and as the apostles died, other ‚elders‘ had to take on their role as ‚overseers‘, even if they did not have the same authority.
    • Most of them could not read, let alone write. It had to be read out loud in the congregation. Or someone had to quote – either from the scriptures or from oral tradition.
    • The oral tradition became more and more difficult because the eyewitnesses died. And then those who still knew the eyewitnesses. At some point, many had never met Jesus, nor an eyewitness, nor those who knew them.
    • The various congregations had to deal with very different cultural contexts and local religions.
    • With the disciples from the Gentiles, completely new philosophical ideas and explanations came into the congregation that did not even exist in the Jewish context. Even if everyone heard the same thing, they did not necessarily understand the same thing because of their different personal backgrounds.
    • According to Acts 1:8, the apostles hoped that they would soon see the establishment of the kingdom. And Jesus did not tell them that it would not be so. Only that it was not their business to know. So this hope remained. But the decades passed. And that raised the question: If you were wrong about this, what might we have misunderstood?

    As we have seen, the New Testament essentially describes the first half of the first century. How did the congregations develop? To answer that, we would also have to look at the other writings from that time, then those of the ‚Apostolic Fathers‘ and the Patristic period. Although that would help us to better understand the development of the congregations, it is beyond the scope of this article. In the next few episodes, I would like to take a closer look at just one important writing.

  • The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 4

    The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 4

    By Christian

    In the last episode, we discussed the topic of “money and donations” in first-century churches. The two other topics we want to address in this episode are: baptism and the peaceful church.

    Baptism in the 1st century

    Who was it that did the baptizing in the first century? Or, to be more precise, who is mentioned in the New Testament? Of course, we read about John the Baptist again and again. But there are others as well:

    Now Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that he was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John —

    John 4:1 NEÜ

    So Jesus baptized? What does the context say?

    although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples. So he left Judea and went back once more to Galilee.

    Johannes 4:2,3 NEÜ

    Well, the founder of this movement did not baptize. But he gave the order (Matthew 28:19). So we learn that Philip baptized (Acts 8:38). What about the apostles? In Acts 10:47,48 it does not sound as if Peter himself baptized. And in Acts 19:3-6, it doesn’t sound like Paul baptized either. Yet he did sometimes, and in this context, he points out a problem that can arise in the Zoom congregation today also:

    Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

    1 Corinthians 1:13-17 NIV

    That is why we so often find the formulation that a person was baptized and not that so-and-so baptized a person.

    And that brings us to the last topic for today.

    The peaceful congregation

    Sometimes the idea of doing it like Christians in the 1st century is also based on the wish that everything will be all right then because you are doing it ‚right‘.

    And indeed, one could get this impression when reading the Acts of the Apostles: at the beginning, the early congregation in Jerusalem appears to be in a state of bliss:

    They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

    Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts,

    All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.

    Acts 1:14; 2:46; 4:32 NIV

    That sounds wonderful. Through God’s blessing and the Holy Spirit, everything was fine, wasn’t it?

    In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Hellenistic Jews a among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food.

    Acts 6:1 NIV

    Look, soon there was dissatisfaction. And there are reports of further difficulties – despite the Holy Spirit and the guidance of Christ:

    This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. 

    After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: … The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul …

     They had such a sharp disagreement that they [Pauls and Barnabas] parted company.

    When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.

    Acts 15:2,7,12,39; Galatians 2:11 NIV

    In 1 Corinthians 3:3, Paul addresses an issue that surely also existed in other congregations:

    You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans?

    1 Corinthians 3:3 NIV

    There are many other texts that address certain problems, but these are enough: maybe we shouldn’t do everything exactly the same way as the first-century Christians after all…

    Before we compare our findings from the text with our situation today, we will first deal with the historical context in the next episode.

  • The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 3

    The Zoom Congregation: Text, Context, Consequences – Part 3

    By Christian

    In the first two episodes, we began to examine the text of the New Testament in relation to the structure of the congregations. Always with the desire of some in mind: “We are doing exactly what the first-century Christians did”. In doing so, we noticed both similarities and differences between the different congregations in the first part of this series.

    As announced, we want to deal with another delicate topic this time: money and donations. Because that is often a delicate topic today, too, and one that people don’t like to talk about. At least people are often less willing to talk about it than to accept donations.

    So let’s first take a look at what the New Testament tells us about the ‚congregation in the 1st century‘.

    The text of the New Testament

    Money and Donations

    The beginnings of the congregation in Jerusalem

    In the last episode, we learned about the first congregation in Jerusalem from the book of Acts:

    All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

    Acts 4:32-35 NIV

    At the beginning of the congregation in Jerusalem, according to the account in the Acts of the Apostles, they shared everything and no one regarded anything as their own private property.

    Did it stay that way and did the other congregations adopt it?

    Other congregations

    What else do we know about support from others?

    All they asked was that we [Paul and Barnabas] should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I had been eager to do all along.

    Galatians 2:10 NIV

    Which ‚poor‘ were they talking about here? And how did it happen? Paul is talking here about a meeting with James, Peter, John and others in Jerusalem. In the Acts of the Apostles we read:

    During this time some prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. One of them, named Agabus, stood up and through the Spirit predicted that a severe famine would spread over the entire Roman world. (This happened during the reign of Claudius.) The disciples, as each one was able, decided to provide help for the brothers and sisters living in Judea. This they did, sending their gift to the elders by Barnabas and Saul.

    Acts 11:27-30 Schlachter 2000

    So the support was organized because of a special situation. Which was not only important because of the famine. As we had already read, the people in Jerusalem had sold their possessions and distributed them at Pentecost because of the special situation. And then they were soon persecuted and scattered. This situation was also the reason for another action:

    For Macedonia and Achaia were pleased to make a contribution for the poor among the Lord’s people in Jerusalem.

    Romans 15:26 NIV

    Now about the collection for the Lord’s people: Do what I told the Galatian churches to do. On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with your income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made. Then, when I arrive, I will give letters of introduction to the men you approve and send them with your gift to Jerusalem. If it seems advisable for me to go also, they will accompany me.

    1 Corinthians 16:1-4 NIV

    For the Corinthians, there were even more instructions regarding these donations in 2 Corinthians 8 and

    By the way, did you notice that the donations were always intended for the congregation in Jerusalem or in Judea? So it was about a specific situation that became necessary due to the specific historical development of the congregation in Jerusalem.

    They were pleased to do it, and indeed they owe it to them. For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews‘ spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings.

    Romans 15:27 NIV

    Do you know of a report in the New Testament in which a collection of donations was carried out for a congregation other than the one in Jerusalem and Judea? That is, a fundraiser for the congregation in Rome or Antioch or somewhere else?

    I am not talking about direct help for someone in need (James 1:27). That was entirely in line with what Jesus said about gifts for the poor (Mat 6:2-4). But even for that, there was no organized donation facility in the congregation. That was a very personal matter, as Jesus said.

    In the New Testament, we only find collections for the congregations in Jerusalem and Judea due to special circumstances.

    There is also a special group in connection with donations.

    Donations for apostles and overseers?

    Acts 20:35 is often used in connection with financial donations, but Paul also addresses another point before that, which is not so often quoted:

    “I have not coveted anyone’s silver or gold or clothing [‚desired‘ Schlachter, Züricher]. You yourselves know that these hands of mine have supplied my own needs and the needs of my companions. In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’ ” [It is apparently an oral saying of the Lord that is not contained in the Gospels, but compare Luke 6:38; 11:9; John 13:34. NEÜ]

    Acts 20:33-35 NIV, comment from Schlachter and NEÜ versions

    Paul did not demand anything, not even from this congregation, which he co-founded. On the contrary, he worked himself in order to give to others in need. Paul is often quoted or taken as an example when it comes to ordering or regulating something. However, this part is rarely or never heard from such people. He also criticized this point in another famous congregation that he had founded. And in a rather ironic way:

    Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not the result of my work in the Lord? Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you! For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord. This is my defense to those who sit in judgment on me.

    If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more? But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ. Don’t you know that those who serve in the temple get their food from the temple, and that those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel. But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me, for I would rather die than allow anyone to deprive me of this boast.

    What then is my reward? Just this: that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make full use of my rights as a preacher of the gospel.

    1 Corinthians 9:1-3, 11-15, 18 Züricher

    Was it a sin for me to lower myself in order to elevate you by preaching the gospel of God to you free of charge? I robbed other churches by receiving support from them so as to serve you. And when I was with you and needed something, I was not a burden to anyone, for the brothers who came from Macedonia supplied what I needed. I have kept myself from being a burden to you in any way, and will continue to do so.

    2 Corinthians 11:7-9 NIV

    In many translations, the irony in Paul’s words is not really conveyed: “[Oh well, then… I guess] I must have robbed other congregations by accepting their provisions in order to serve you!” (2001 Translation)

    But where did Paul get this? “In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.” (1 Corinthians 9:14 NIV) So for one thing, Paul never heard Jesus personally. So it must have been handed down. But you won’t find it that way in the New Testament, only this:

    Stay there, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house.

    Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, a drive out demons. Freely you have received; freely give. “Do not get any gold or silver or copper to take with you in your belts— no bag for the journey or extra shirt or sandals or a staff, for the worker is worth his keep.

    Luke 10:7; Matthew 10:8-10. Zurich [Strikethrough in the text indicates questionable text.

    But that sounds quite different from “Those who preach the gospel should live by the gospel”.

    If we compare what Paul said with what we read in Acts 2:41-47, that the congregation had everything in common, and in 4:32-35, that they provided the money for the congregation, we see that things were done differently later on in Ephesus and Corinth. What Paul wrote to the Galatians is more appropriate:

    Nevertheless, the one who receives instruction in the word should share all good things with their instructor.

    Galatians 6:6 NIV

    And the congregation in Philippi supported him – when he was in need:

    Yet it was good of you to share in my troubles. Moreover, as you Philippians know, in the early days of your acquaintance with the gospel, when I set out from Macedonia, not one church shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving, except you only; for even when I was in Thessalonica, you sent me aid more than once when I was in need. Not that I desire your gifts; what I desire is that more be credited to your account. I have received full payment and have more than enough. I am amply supplied, now that I have received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent. They are a fragrant offering, an acceptable sacrifice, pleasing to God.

    Philippians 4:14-18 NIV

    Paul was well aware of the problem that can arise from supporting overseers and elders. The New Testament points out the danger:

    Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve;

    1 Peter 5:2 NIV

    So even then it was clear that you could make it in religious communities. And over the centuries you can see time and again how easy it is to get money out of people for the salvation of their souls. Or for the ’support of such valuable, hard-working (circuit) overseers‘.

    Paul does say that, like others, he could in principle expect to be supported for his work. But he accepted it only in need.

    He emphasizes that he has worked himself: for his needs and even for others in need.

    In the next part, we will take a look at the baptism and the peaceful community.

  • The Zoom congregation: text, context, consequences – Part 2

    The Zoom congregation: text, context, consequences – Part 2

    By Christian

    After dealing with the beginnings of the church in Jerusalem in the first part, we now want to take a closer look at its further development.

    Congregations in apostolic times

    The term apostle refers to three different groups of people, see the video “Should we call ourselves apostles?”. Were the original 12 apostles only in the Jerusalem congregation or also elsewhere?

    One of the earliest additional congregations was in Antioch:

    Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off. The two of them, sent on their way by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia and sailed from there to Cyprus.

    Acts 13:1-4 NEÜ

    Here, some of the men in the congregation are referred to as prophets and teachers, but not as elders. And none of the 12 apostles are there. When there were differences of opinion, when men from Jerusalem came to Antioch, we learn about a change in the structure of the congregation in Jerusalem:

    This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question.

    Acts 15:2 NEÜ

    So it is mentioned here that there were already men in Jerusalem who were called elders. If this was around the year 48, then almost two decades had passed and the 12 apostles had also traveled to other cities. In this respect, others in the congregation in Jerusalem had to take responsibility, but were not referred to as apostles.

    In the early congregation in Antioch, there were prophets and teachers, but in Jerusalem there were apostles and elders.

    In Antioch, they prayed and fasted before an important decision and the Holy Spirit spoke.

    At least we learn from Acts 20:17 that there were later ‚elders‘ in Ephesus:

    From Miletus, Paul sent to Ephesus for the elders of the church.

    Apostelgeschichte 20:17 NIV

    So here we have the term πρεσβυτέρους (presbyterous) again, meaning ‚elders‚. But this is not a new term for a position in the congregation of disciples; it is used 66 times in the New Testament.

    It is only in Acts 20 that we learn anything more about our topic.

    Overseers and Deacons

    Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church [the congregation of God [other manuscripts: the congregation of the Lord]] of God, a which he bought with his own blood.

    Acts 20:28 NIV, comment from Elberfelder

    So there were episkopos, or overseers, who had been appointed by the Holy Spirit. Unfortunately, we are not told how this came about. But as for who was meant by this:

    From Miletus, Paul sent to Ephesus for the elders of the church [congregation]. 

    Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church [the congregation of God [other manuscripts: the congregation of the Lord]] of God, a which he bought with his own blood.

    Acts 20:17, 28 NIV, comment from Elberfelder

    Here he refers to the πρεσβυτέρους (presbyterous) as ‚elders‚ who had been appointed by the Holy Spirit as ἐπισκόπους (episkopous) ‚overseers‚. This term occurs a total of five times in the New Testament:

    Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, a which he bought with his own blood.

    Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all God’s holy people in Christ Jesus at Philippi, together with the overseers and deacons: …

    Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, …

    Since an overseer manages God’s household, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain.

    For “you were like sheep going astray,” but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.

    Acts 20:28; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:7; 1 Peter 2:25 NIV

    The last use in 1 Peter 2:25, however, does not speak of an overseer in the congregation, but of Jesus Christ Himself. And already on the basis of the connection between ‚overseer‘ and ’shepherd‘ in this verse and Acts 20:28, it is clear that it is not about the supervision of the flock, but the responsibility for the flock. HELPS Word-Studies comments:

    „Though in some contexts 1985 (epískopos) has been regarded traditionally as a position of authority, in reality the focus is upon the responsibility for caring for others“ (L & N, 1, 35.40).

    HELPS Word-studies zu episkopos, Strong’s 1985

    This word is used in 1 Timothy 3:1 (i.e. in the direct context) and is directly related to the word epískopos:

    The word is trustworthy [or faithful]: when someone aspires to the office of overseer [ἐπισκοπῆς (episkopēs); episkopé a visit, a supervision], he desires a good work.

    And they shall cast you out, and your children within you, and shall not leave in you one stone upon another; because you knew not the time of your visitation [episkopé, a visitation, a supervision].

    For it is written in the book of Psalms, “Let his dwelling place be desolate, so that no one will dwell in it,” and, “Let another take over his duty of oversight [episkopé, a visiting, a supervision]!”

    And conduct yourselves well among the Gentiles, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may, by your good works which they observe, glorify God in the day of visitation. [episkopé a visit, an oversight]

    1 Timothy 3:1; Luke 19:44; Acts 1:20; 1 Peter 2:12 Elberfelder

    Now ‚visitation‘ sounds even worse than ‚overseer‘ (In German the work ‚Heimsuchung‘ is used, which has a real negative connotation). But it is only used once in relation to elders. Twice it refers to a time when God is looking closely. And then it is used as a reason why a new, 12th apostle is being chosen.

    In Philippians 1:1, we had found not only ‚overseers‘ but also ‚deacons‚ (or servants) διακόνοις (diakonois). This word is used 29 times in the New Testament and in a very general sense for all disciples and in Romans 13 even for the state authorities! At that time, it was not yet a term for a specific office in the congregation, but a generally used word was employed. However, those who were ‚deacons‘ for the congregation in a special way were to fulfill certain requirements:

    In the same way, deacons are to be worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain.

    A deacon must be faithful to his wife and must manage his children and his household well. …

    1 Timothy 3:8, 12 NIV

    We therefore note:

    In the congregations, there were πρεσβυτέρους (presbyterous) ‚elders‘ who served as ἐπισκόπους (episkopous) ‚overseers‘. And there were still ‚deacons‘ διακόνοις (diakonois).

    How were they appointed? In Acts 20:28, Paul says that they “had been appointed by the Holy Spirit.” How? According to Acts 6:6, the apostles laid their hands on deacons. In 2 Timothy 1:6, Paul says to Timothy, “Wherefore I put thee in remembrance of the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands.” However, according to 1 Timothy 4:14, the elders did this: “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.”

    In the 1st century, elders and deacons were appointed by the laying on of hands by the 12 apostles, other apostles or the elders.

    The apostles also laid their hands on other believers:

    When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

    Acts 8:14-17 NIV

    In the first century, the disciples in Samaria received the Holy Spirit after the apostles Peter and John laid their hands on them.

    We can see from the book of Acts that there was no such thing as ‚the one congregation‘ in the first century. Due to developments and needs, the structure of the first Jerusalem congregation changed to that of the later congregations in the area of the Gentiles.

    We have already learned some interesting aspects about the first-century churches. Before we get to the historical context, however, we should take a closer look at other important topics in the next two parts: money, donations, baptisms, and the peaceful church.

  • The Zoom congregation: text, context, consequences – Part 1

    The Zoom congregation: text, context, consequences – Part 1

    By Christian

    “We are doing exactly what the first-century Christians did” is a common but rather general claim that we hear time and again when it comes to the formation of house churches, Bible study groups, or even communities that meet via the internet. In the following, I will simply call the latter a ‚Zoom congregation‘.1 But what exactly is meant by this claim? As we shall see, the challenges and full implications of this statement only become apparent when it is analyzed in more detail or applied in everyday life. Or, for example, when the community in the case of a Zoom congregation continues to grow.

    I would like to emphasize one thing right at the beginning: Under no circumstances should the impression be created that it is ‚wrong‘ for believers to meet and exchange ideas using modern means of communication. Often there is no other way due to distance or health reasons. It is more like a visit of other believers at their home.

    But what happens when more and more people are involved? When the size of a congregation is reached or exceeded? When talks are given to hundreds of people? When the organization is extended to meetings in other languages? Then it becomes challenging in many ways when you think you can do it ‚exactly as the first century Christians did‘. And that’s what this series is about.

    It is very interesting to see what the text of the New Testament really says about this. We will start with this in this series. After that, we will take a closer look at the historical context. And finally, we will consider the consequences of actually implementing what we have learned: “We do it exactly like the first-century Christians”.

    So let’s take a closer look at the first-century church. What does the New Testament text say about it?

    The text of the New Testament

    The congregation at the time of Jesus

    Shouldn’t we first ask what Jesus himself has to say on the subject? What did Jesus say about how his followers should meet and organize themselves? Well, this:

    „“

    Jesus Christ to the organization of the congregation of his disciples

    Or to put it another way: during Jesus‘ ministry, there was no congregation in the sense that we understand it today. We have no record at all of what Jesus himself said on the subject. Even though many followed him. And he also chose 12 apostles. And then he also chose 70 others and sent them out. And women accompanied him on his travels.

    What Jesus did assure his disciples of, however, was this:

    For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.

    Matthew 18:20 ESV

    The Gospel of Matthew concludes with these words:

    When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

    Matthew 28:17-20 NIV

    Of course, this was a surprising and extremely big task. But didn’t anyone ask, “And how should we do that, Lord? How should we organize the baptisms and teachings?” Perhaps they simply trusted that Jesus would be with them and explain it later. As He had always done before.

    However, the closing in Mark sounds different:

    Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen. He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

    Mark 16:14-16 NIV

    That sounds more as if they are supposed to preach and the rest takes care of itself. As if there were no reason to think about congregations. However, this is the long ending, which, like the short ending that also exists, is probably not authentic.

    In Luke, we only find this:

    He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

    Luke 24:46, 47 NIV

    And in the Gospel of John, we find no instructions at all for the conclusion. But perhaps there were more instructions later from the ‚helper‘ or the Holy Spirit?

    The Jerusalem Congregation (Beginnings)

    Since we didn’t find anything on the subject in the Gospels, it seems obvious to look at the Acts of the Apostles. In the Acts of the Apostles, Luke reports on what happened after Jesus‘ resurrection and shortly before his ascension:

    Then they gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

    Acts 1:6-8 NIV

    So still no further instructions. Did you notice what they were to receive through the Holy Spirit? ‚Power‘. It does not say anything about special abilities to understand the scriptures ‚correctly‘. But that is just a side note. What did the disciples do?

    When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

    In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) …

    Acts 1:13-15 NIV

    Then Pentecost came in 33 A.D.:

    When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place

    Apg 2:1 NIV

    And then something extraordinary happened: the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. At that time, many “God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven” (Acts 2:5 NIV) were in Jerusalem. They had only just received instructions to preach, and then this happened:

    Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day. They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. Everyone was filled with awe at the many wonders and signs performed by the apostles. All the believers were together and had everything in common. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

    Acts 2:41-47 NIV

    It is mentioned twice that they all came together, and that there were about 120 of them, which is quite a number for an upper room. They were in the temple, meeting in their homes for the Lord’s Supper and for meals and prayers together. And now with 30 times as many people! And there were more and more. And still no instructions on how to hold meetings! Interestingly, the synagogues are not mentioned here. But we can already record what they did:

    According to the Acts of the Apostles, the Jerusalem congregation met in the temple and in homes. The synagogues are not mentioned.

    In their homes, they (1) devoted themselves to the apostles‘ teaching; (2) they broke bread together; (3) they prayed together; (4) they ate together; (5) they shared everything in common.

    “Everything was done with great joy and sincere warmth.”

    In Acts 4, we find another interesting clue:

    All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

    Acts 4:32-35 NIV

    We note:

    So the 12 apostles played a crucial role.

    „All the believers were one in heart and mind.“

    „No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.“

    However, it was not long before problems arose:

    At that time, when the number of disciples was constantly growing, there was also discontent in the congregation. The Hellenists [Greek-speaking Jews who were born outside Israel and only moved to Jerusalem in old age] complained about the Hebrews [Jews born in Israel who spoke Hebrew or Aramaic] because their widows were overlooked in the daily care.

    Acts 6:1 NEÜ

    So there were problems despite the outpouring of the Holy Spirit! Despite the ‚manifest guidance of the Spirit‘? What should one do? There were still no instructions from Jesus. Did the Holy Spirit take care of that in this case?

    So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, “It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. Brothers and sisters, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word.” This proposal pleased the whole group. They chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit; also Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas from Antioch, a convert to Judaism. They presented these men to the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them.

    Acts 6:2-6 NEÜ

    The 12 apostles led the congregation in Jerusalem.

    Later, 7 men (no women) were selected for other tasks.

    With growth came problems and discontent.

    By the way: Did you notice that it was she who called the whole gathering of disciples together? So, with 120 in the upper room, no problem. But we had read about 3000 and even more… And what about ‚guidance by the Holy Spirit‘ here? Read again and think about it.

    We read further in the Acts of the Apostles that James, a brother of Jesus, and other elders were later in the Jerusalem congregation: “On the next day Paul went in with us to James; and all the elders were present.” (Acts 21:18)

    Shortly after the first congregation was established in Jerusalem, perhaps as early as 34, Stephen was stoned, a wave of persecution began, and the Jerusalem congregation changed:

    Now those who had been scattered by the persecution that broke out when Stephen was killed traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, spreading the word only among Jews.

    Acts 11:19 NIV

    Not long after, there was the stoning of Stephen, the persecution of the congregation in Jerusalem, and many were scattered and went far away.

    What effect did this have? What do we learn about the churches in apostolic times? We will look at this in the next episode.

    1. I do not receive any compensation from Zoom for using the term. It is just one of the well-known and frequently used tools for such online meetings. ↩︎