When did the church in Acts 2 begin?

[@@Paul@@]

(Act 2:47 KJV) Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.​

Of course I’ve always wondered when this “church” started. It was “added to” in Acts 2, so it obviously didn't start here.

Mat 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.​

We also see a Jewish synagogue being refered to as a “church” in the gospels, so it wasn't there.

Act 7:37-38 KJV
(37) This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.
(38) This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:​

It’s possible it started at Mt. Sinai with the giving of the commandments. And even here in Acts 7 was strictly a Jewish church. Note:

Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.​

Almost 10 years after Pentecost, it was still “unlawful” for a Jew to keep company with a Gentile.

Act 10:36-37 KJV
(36) The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all
(37) That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;​

Here we see the “word” was only “sent” to the children of Israel, and it was the same message was being preached (and to the same people) since John the Baptist came on the scene.

The LXX uses the word ekklesia to translate the Hebrew qahal. Qahal means to call, to assemble, and the noun form means a congregation or assembly. Solomon is called koheleth the Preacher, translated by the LXX ekklesiastes. The earliest known occurrence of the word is found in Job 30:28, "I cried in the congregation." In the books of the law, qahal is rendered by the Greek word sunagoge, showing that the synagogue is the beginning of the N.T. church.

Since this word "church" is a Hebrew idea, which means “to call" "or assemble" and the Greek word used simply means “an assembly”. I see no reason not to assume that this church is “an assemby” which according to Acts 7 “could” have been started at the giving of the Law.

Now, what was God’s purpose for Israel? Could this nation really be considered a church prior to Acts?

Deu 14:2 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.​

Well, they were to be a “holy and peculiar people”. Even Peter agrees. 1Pe 2:9. So it seems to me, at least UP till Acts 10, we see the same Jewish "church" started at Sinai…

Awaiting thunder bolt.

 

[KennySe]

Jesus said he would build His Church. (See 16th chapter of Matthew)

 

[@@Paul@@]

Jesus said he would build His Church. (See 16th chapter of Matthew)

Yes i know,, i'm not really saying otherwise...

Jesus could have started it "in the wilderness".

 

[christian-only]

How can men be added to a church that they are already a part of??? If the church in Acts 2 were the church of Moses started in Sinai, there would be NO NEED for the Jews to be added to it because they were already part of it. The adding of Jews to the church in verse 47 must then of necessity be speaking of a different church!

Entrance to the church of Moses started at Sinai was by circumcision in the flesh. Entrance into the church of Christ started in Jerusalem is by baptism in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in which a believer is raised with Christ if at the point of his baptism he has faith in the operation that the Holy Spirit has promised to perform therein, which is spiritual resurrection, spiritual circumcision, and rebirth. (Col 2:12, Acts 2) Since entrance to the church in Acts 2 is found to be by baptism, i.e. Acts 2:41, we see that the church mentioned there is the church of Christ and not the church of Moses. Furthermore, as already stated, there is no way to add a man to a church that he's already in, and since the Jews were already in the church of Moses, they could not be added to it, but only be added to a different church, even the church of Christ.

Now then, some similarities that help show that the church of Christ was started in Acts 2:

1. Just as the church of Moses in Sinai was started on a Pentecost, so also the church of Christ in Jerusalem was started on a Pentecost.
   
2. Just as fire on Mount Sinai accompanied the beginning of Moses' church, so also fire on the heads of the apostles accompanied the beginning of Christ's church.
   
3. Just as God spoke in lightnings on Sinai (which according to the Jews were the 70 languages of the time) to confirm the beginning of Moses' church, so also God spoke in tongues through the apostles to confirm the beginning of Christ's church.
   
4. Just as a the Law of Moses was given on Sinai to govern Moses' church, the Law of Christ was given in Jerusalem to govern Christ's church.
   
5. Just as the entrance to Moses' church (circumcision) pointed forward to Christ's bloody death, even so the entrance to Christ's church (baptism) points back to His death (which baptism plants the believer into, Rom 6:5).
   

 

[@@Paul@@]

How can men be added to a church that they are already a part of??? If the church in Acts 2 were the church of Moses started in Sinai, there would be NO NEED for the Jews to be added to it because they were already part of it. The adding of Jews to the church in verse 47 must then of necessity be speaking of a different church!

Nice point. But this "could" be a new calling for that "church in the wilderness". Hence, the need for repentance. John the Baptist did come on the scene preaching "..in the wilderness" the message OF repentance.

I do not see Israel being "cast-off" at Acts 2, therefore i'm led to believe this is a 'continuation' of God's great plan for Israel which He began at Sinai.

[*]Just as the church of Moses in Sinai was started on a Pentecost, so also the church of Christ in Jerusalem was started on a Pentecost.
[*]Just as fire on Mount Sinai accompanied the beginning of Moses' church, so also fire on the heads of the apostles accompanied the beginning of Christ's church.
[*]Just as God spoke in lightnings on Sinai (which according to the Jews were the 70 languages of the time) to confirm the beginning of Moses' church, so also God spoke in tongues through the apostles to confirm the beginning of Christ's church.
[*]Just as a the Law of Moses was given on Sinai to govern Moses' church, the Law of Christ was given in Jerusalem to govern Christ's church.

The church during Acts was always refered to as the Church of God, not the church of Christ and being called the church of God could point to the "church in the wilderness" as this was founded by God.

So you're saying the church of God (as named in Acts) started AT Pentecost?

[*]Just as the entrance to Moses' church (circumcision) pointed forward to Christ's bloody death, even so the entrance to Christ's church (baptism) points back to His death (which baptism plants the believer into, Rom 6:5).

Nothing in the OT pointed to the death of Christ... It was all about His coming to sit on the throne as King. Of course there were hints which we can clearly see now, but clearly the pointing was to glorious kingdom promised to Israel.

 

[Bizzlebin Imperatoris]

Plenty of prophecy on his death exists in the O. And indeed, we are in his glorious kingdom, the church. It is not that the scriptures made it out to be some rich, worldy empire; we did that to the scripture.

 

[@@Paul@@]

Plenty of prophecy on his death exists in the O. And indeed, we are in his glorious kingdom, the church. It is not that the scriptures made it out to be some rich, worldy empire; we did that to the scripture.

Amillenial i presume?? ........... So lions started eating grass have they? and napping with little sheepsies.

All joking aside... Obviously i'm some form of pre-mill. so you'll understand if i don't agree with you...

 

[christian-only]

Nothing in the OT pointed to the death of Christ... It was all about His coming to sit on the throne as King. Of course there were hints which we can clearly see now, but clearly the pointing was to glorious kingdom promised to Israel.

That dangerous and erroneous position is obviously what's causing you the problem here, and frankly you are losing some of the most beautiful things in the Bible. The Passover sacrifice pointed to Christ's death. The connection is even stated in the NT "Christ our passover is sacrificed for us" (1 Cor 5:7) Just as the lamb was observed for 4 days before it was sacrificed, Jesus was observed 4 days from his entrance into Jerusalem on "Palm Sunday" to his crucifixion. Just as not one bone of the Passover lamb was to be broken, not one of his bones was broken. He was nailed to the cross the same time tha lamb was tied down and died the same time it died. He spoke the same words "it is finished" that the priest spoke when killing the lamb. Just like that Lamb, he was spottless and without blemish, and in the prime of his life. But not only did the Passover lamb point to Christ's death, but the Ram caught in the thicket when Abraham was to sacrifice Isaac. That Ram caught in the thicket that took Isaac's place pointed to Christ, who had a crown of thorns put on his head (just like that ram was caught in the thorns) and who took our place (just like that ram took Isaac's place) and who died on Mount Moriah (just as that ram did) and who God provided (just as God provided that ram) and it was said by Abraham "In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen" or "In the Mount of The LORD it shall be provided." In that same mount, our atonement was provided and seen in the death of Christ on the cross. Not only this, but Moses holding up his hands, the serpent raised up in the wilderness, the passage that they would cast wood in his bread, and the phrase in Psalm 22:21 "thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns" all point to the cross, for the horns of unicorns intersecting make no figure other than the cross, and Moses held his hands up in the form of a cross, and just as the serpent was raised up in the wilderness Jesus made a show of the serpent by dying on the cross. Then there's Isaiah 53 - that was certainly about dying, now wasn't it?

It was all about His coming to sit on the throne as King

Not all, but some of it was, yes. But he IS sitting on His throne as King right now. He received the Kingdom at His ascension when "one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." (Dan 7:13-14) He reigns in His kingdom already! Jesus said "My kingdom is not of this world:" (John 18:36) He did not ever intend to setup an earthly kingdom. When the Jews begged him to set one up he ran away. He will not set up an earthly kingdom, period. THE Kingdom is already established, and John and Paul were both in it, having been translated into the kingdom of his dear Son Col 1:13, my brothers, and companions in tribulation, and in the kingdom Rev 1:9.

So lions started eating grass have they? and napping with little sheepsies.

The Jews and Gentiles, once as unable to live together as these animals, are brought together in peace, in the church, which is the Kingdom.

 

[prodromos]

The church began in Genesis 2:7
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

 

[@@Paul@@]

The church began in Genesis 2:7
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

nice... thanks..

 

[@@Paul@@]

That dangerous and erroneous position is obviously what's causing you the problem here, and frankly you are losing some of the most beautiful things in the Bible. The Passover sacrifice pointed to Christ's death

Let me quickly rephrase what i meant.

Although everything POINTED to calvary, that's NOT why Israel was choosen as a Holy Nation.

Israel was not waiting for calvary (no one had any idea He was going to give His life a ransom for all), they were waiting for the glorious Kingdom..

Thanks for you comments...

 

[christian-only]

Let me quickly rephrase what i meant.

Although everything POINTED to calvary, that's NOT why Israel was choosen as a Holy Nation.

Israel was not waiting for calvary (no one had any idea He was going to give His life a ransom for all), they were waiting for the glorious Kingdom..

They misinterpreted the prophecies - they thought he was coming to set up an earthly kingdom, and they were wrong, but we don't have to be wrong with them. "My Kingdom is NOT of this world" (Jesus)