An excellent article regarding fundamental Bible understanding where the author says “One must take the “sum” of truth on a
particular item (Psalm 119:160) — not “some” of the truth.”
Go to the article and build your faith.
The day of Pentecost as referenced in Acts 2 was a result of fifty days from the Passover Sabbath (πεντηκοστή pentēkostē fiftieth from Passover, Strong’s Dict.). This day was counted from “the morrow of the Sabbath” (Lev.23:15) when the omer of barley harvest i.e. “wave sheaf” was first cut. The count of these weeks was to start the day the sickle cut that first wave offering (Dt.16:9). This barley harvest was to be over and done within 7 weeks i.e. 49 days from which the “Feast of Ingathering” (Ex.23:16) or “Day of First Fruits” (Num.28:26) as they were known under the Old Testament could begin. This day of Pentecost marked the beginning of the wheat harvest, hence the term “first fruits”. It is no coincidence, in my humble opinion, that the two different corns represent the Old (i.e., barley) and the New Testaments (i.e., wheat) [any crop farmer will attest barley always precedes wheat in harvest times].
A simple count of 49 days beginning “the morrow of the Sabbath” will, without exception, bring one to the first day of the week that we call Sunday. This day marked the beginning of the church, of which there is, without exception, only one (Eph.4:4).
It goes without saying this church needed entry conditions explained i.e. the plan of salvation given by Peter upon request of those who crucified Jesus (Acts 2:37—41). In addition, this church was instructed via the “apostle’s doctrine” regarding fellowship and worship (Acts 2:42-47). It is important to note that the “breaking of bread” in verse 42 differs from “breaking bread from house to house” found in verse 46. The former concerns the immediate context with the Lord’s Supper memorial for “the breaking” is tn klasis i.e. the fracture, the specific act of breaking the specific bread [the Greek places the definite article tn before breaking and tov before bread indicating specificity] that Adam Clarke points out: “Breaking of bread was that act which preceded a feast or meal, and which was performed by the master of the house, when he pronounced the blessing – what we would call grace before meat”. The word is employed by Matthew in chapter 26:26 where Jesus, the Master, “took the bread, blessed it and broke [klasis] it” because it represented His body upon the soon to be realised cross, a solemn and shameful (Gal.3:13) event. This in contrast with the latter “break” is klaō i.e. to generically break which the immediate context of the remainder of the verse says “they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart”. They were simply breaking the food apart to eat it with gladness of fellowship together with people of common salvation.
This having been said indicates the absolute importance of the first day of the week for the church to assemble for authorised worship and fellowship.
Many people are confused about the question of whether or not one joins the church which the Christ built or is added to it. Some rather casually say that they have decided to join the church of Christ. However, is that statement one that can be made accurately in light of what the Bible says about this subject? To find the answers, consultation of the Scriptures will be necessary. Acts chapter two describes the inception of the church. At the end of the chapter, Luke records this, “Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved” (Acts 2:47). An examination of this verse in the Greek text reveals that “the Lord” is the subject of this sentence. As the subject of this sentence, the Lord is doing the action, which is the Greek word translated “added.” Hence, God is performing the action of adding. Webster’s dictionary from 1828 gives these definitions for “add”: “…1. To set or put together, join or unite, as one thing or sum to another, in an aggregate; as, add three to four, the sum is seven. 2. To unite in idea or consideration; to subjoin… 3. To increase number… 4. To augment…” (E-sword, 2007). Those who were “added” were united or brought into the church by God. The next point that should be understood is the object of the “adding.” The Greek participle and its article “tous (article) sozomenous (participle)” is translated “such as should be saved” which we would understand as “the being saved ones.” This Greek word and its article are in the accusative case meaning that it is the direct object of the verb. “The being saved ones” were being added.
Who then are these saved ones? Our Lord clarified this in Mark chapter sixteen, “And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:15-16). Jesus plainly stated that the saved are comprised of those that believe and obey the Gospel. Now please consider Acts 2:38-41. Those that were baptized (remember Mark 16:16) were those that had hearkened unto Peter’s sermon. Peter preached the Gospel, (again, please remember Mark 16:16) they believed, and were baptized; thus, becoming part of the saved. And it is the saved that were “added” by the Lord. There is an indirect object in this sentence, as well. The Greek noun and its article “ta (article) ekklasia (noun)” are in the dative case meaning that they are indirect objects. “The church” is the body into which the saved were added. The verb “added” was done to the saved and the saved were placed into the church. All of this was done by God.
The above explanations are somewhat in depth, though certainly not exhaustive. The verse which has been examined is a very simple and straight forward pronouncement of the process in question. Daniel chapter two supports the fact that the Lord adds one to the church, not man.
“And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the
clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure” (Dan. 2:44-45). This kingdom (which is the church) would not be established or founded by men.
Our Lord said that He would build (establish) His church (Matt: 16:18). The adding of souls to that church was certainly a part of its establishment. Jesus said He would build His church. He is saying by implication that He would be adding to His body. The Lord is head over the church (Col. 1:18); and as Head, He determines the way into His body.
Our Lord rules over His kingdom (Col. 1:13, 18). Headship of the church, salvation, forgiveness, reconciliation, and the giving of commandments to be obeyed belongs to the Christ. The church was prepared, established, and is kept by God and not by man. The church is not a man-made nor human ruled body, to which we may join ourselves at our own discretion and upon our own terms. Acts 2:47 states the matter very plainly: the Lord adds us to church upon our obedience to the Gospel.
To O’Reilly’s credit he presented Mr Zafar with damning quotes from the Quran and Hadith that incontrovertibly backed Ms. Sultan’s position and got him to explain them away. Unfortunately, O’Reilly did not live up to his show being a ‘No Spin Zone’ because the Islamist waffled on without a shred of proof, just as I predicted in my last post.
Come on O’Reilly, get in the ‘Zone’ ’cause you have gone soft on the ‘No Spin’!
Watching the O’Reilly Factor last night on a segment regarding the rape and beating of the young woman Ms. Imam in Libya in recent days, I could not believe my ears to hear the ‘No Spin’ guy spout off this ignorant statement;
“I find it hard to believe the prophet Mohammad would preach a doctrine, a religious doctrine where women can be abused at anytime by any Muslim man and be, you know, not held accountable in heaven or hell.”
O’Reilly is as ignorant as the rest of the ‘liberal loons’ he likes to castigate regarding the truth behind the Moon-god worshipers. As Wafa Sultan. MD, the woman he was interviewing said, people need to do some honest research into what this evil religion is all about.
To top it off, O’Reilly said he would welcome on any Muslim on the show who would defend Sharia Law and deny the claims made by Ms Sultan. Yeah, like we are going to take the word of a follower of a raving lunatic who was responsible for the rape and murder of thousands in the 7th Century all in the name of the Moon-god, Allah. Give us a break, mate!
By the way, latest reports are now saying the young woman at the centre of this horrific example of the so-called peaceful religion at work is to charged with defamation against Islam.
It is about time the truth needs to really stand up, O’Reilly and live up to your self-proclaimed slogan.
Many who subscribe to the unscriptural position that Jesus is coming back to earth and will reign on the throne of David in Jerusalem will surely be disappointed according to this outline.
The fact is, the Bible is mans only guide to matters concerning the Kingdom of God and it clearly implies the premillennial doctrine is fantasy.
I see the “peaceful” religion is at it again. This time a 19 year old girl forced into an arranged marriage runs away and is caught with the one she really wants to cleave to and both are brutally executed.
WARNING! the video is disturbing to say the least. Wake up liberals, this is what to expect if you go along with Islamic sharia law. No wonder Kipling called Islam the “thuggee cult”.