on the walk

There were three big catalysts that started me wondering what church events should look like.  The first was a church change.  There was surprisingly little overlap between the kind of events hosted by one church and the kind hosted by the other.  Yet both churches were healthy and God honoring churches led by wise biblically literate people. The second two were biblical texts, one of which is today’s text.

Were are working though acts and we are still on Acts 2:42-47.  In that last post I talked about the general practices that were embodied in this new community.  To these four practices the church was devoted and in light of this devotion, God grew the church.  In the midst of this description two very different kinds of events are described.  The details we get are so few.  Just enough for us to wonder, to ponder, what were those early Christians doing.  The context for these two events is so different, the clearly served vastly different functions in the light of the church.

The two events were daily events.  I wonder how often did an individual attend.  How long did they last, were they scheduled or continuous?  Were they planned in advance or did it happen organically.  So much of what is described in these few verses occurs organically that one might suggest that these events represent a similar phenomena.  On the other hand, it is hard to imagine that all this was happening with no forethought or planning.  Two event locations are identified: the temple and homes. Let’s tackle the homes first.

Here is the sentences in which homes show up, “They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people.”  The double listing of “break bread” and “eat together” makes it pretty clear that breaking of bread is more than just sharing meals but must refer to some sort of symbolic meal.  Presumably this is a commemoration of the last supper.  I wonder what was happening in these hoem meetings. Are they “house churches” or “small groups.”  Did they have a program or just share a meal?  Was this a consistent group of people meeting various homes or do they simply mean that hospitality was so rampant that people just continually found themselves eating together.

What we can know however is still pretty significant.   One of the events of the early church was a consistent, home-based, cross centered meal.  Those are three pretty big elements.  This is one of the key events of the early church, and I am not sure if my church has any event like this.  Sunday morning isn’t this, most small group programs are not this.  Now of course that may not be a problem.  The NT is not a blueprint.  Precedence is not the same as command.  On the other hand, I am in a group right now in which we share a supper each week, and there is something powerful about the experience.  And not only is it powerful, but it is cumulative.  For few weeks they are guests, soon thought they are friends, and not long after that, our lives are becoming intertwined.  We have only been sharing meals once a week for a few months.  I wonder where this could lead.  Could it be that the kind of community described by this text is not some kind of bizarre social experiment, but it is instead the natural off-shoot of eating together weekly with the same people.

The other event is even more mysterious.  What were they doing off in the temple each week.  But I will leave such speculation till the next post, because as we read on in Acts we get one example of what a day at th temple was like.  (I will admit that this does not seem to be a typical day but perhaps there will be clues for the regular events as well as the  exceptional ones.)

on the walk,

-Ethan

Trackback URI | Comments RSS