This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Considering the Church” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, November 21, 1993.

This morning we are beginning our scripture reading in Acts chapter 6. This is Acts chapter 6, and we start at verse 1. Let’s listen to the Word of God. And in those days when the number of the disciples was multiplied, There arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.

Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve tables. Therefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. that they will give, but we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word.

And the saying pleased the whole multitude, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parnimus, and Nicholas, the proselyte of Antioch, whom they set before the apostles. And when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them. The Word of God increased and the number of disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly, and the great company of the priests were obedient to the faith. And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people.” Then turning over to Acts 15. Again, reading from verse 1.

And certain men, which came down from Judea, talked to brethren and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. Being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phoenicia and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles, and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them. But there arose uncertain of the sect of the Pharisees, which believed, saying, that it was needful to circumcise them and to command them to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up and said unto them, Men and brethren, you know how that a good while ago God made choice among us that the Gentiles, by my mouth, should hear the word of the gospel and believe.

And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us, and put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.” Then all the multitude kept silence and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had brought among the Gentiles by them.

Let’s pray together. Help us in our hearing, Lord. Help us, Lord, we who are young. May we hear, and hear with understanding, and with faith, that even at a young age we might treasure these things, and also see them increasingly played out in our lives. You’ve left us all, oh God, young and old alike, that we all may prove to be your children. For we know the kingdom of heaven belongs to children and those who are like them. In Jesus’ name, amen.

Is the Book of Acts normative? Is the Book of Acts normative? That is, can we look at the Book of Acts in order to find, for the Church’s and the Christian’s life, the norms for behavior, for experience, and even for the church’s structure and organization. Now, some of you who are well acquainted with the Book of Acts know that when this particular book is discussed, that this matter, namely the normative character of this book, is always one of the hot topics for discussion.

But let me focus things a bit for you this morning, for all of us, with a few examples. On January 1st, 1901, Agnes Osman, O-Z-M-A-N, was having her evening devotions. She was a student at Bethel Bible College in Kansas City. This particular evening, she was meditating on the Book of Acts and noticing the practice of the Apostles, they laying hands on people in order that those people might receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

She then, following her devotions, sought out the leader of that institution, a man by the name of Charles Parham, P-A-R-H-A-M, and asked him to lay hands on her so that she might receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Well, at first he was taken back, and he refused. But then he relented. And according to her testimony, as soon as he laid his hands on her, she began to speak in different unknown languages.

She then, she said, experienced the filling of God and interpreted these experiences which she had as a revival of Pentecost. the experiences of Pentecost written about in Acts chapter 2. Now, this event is a very important event in modern church history, believe it or not, because it is this event that is recognized as the beginning of the modern-day Pentecostal movement. a movement which claims that the Book of Acts is particularly and specifically normative for the church, and that the church should expect the various phenomena associated in the Book of Acts with the baptism of the Holy Spirit, particularly the speaking with tongues and even gifts of healing and miracles, if not a revival of the office of the apostle itself.

But you should know, you should realize, that the Pentecostals are not the only one that makes special appeal to the Book of Acts as being normative. Down the road a bit here, there is a monument to another group that believed that the Book of Acts was especially normative. I have in mind the Economites, who made their home in present-day Cambridge. The Economites were part of a movement in the last century that included a number of perfectionists and socialist cults, all of which were appealing to portions of that, particularly Acts 2 and Acts 4, as texts that mandated the sale of all private property and the common ownership of all things by the community. There have been others still, including a great number of Congregationalists and even Presbyterians who have looked to the Book of Acts as normative when it comes to specific interests.

For instance, there have been those Congregationalists and Presbyterians who have used an argument from silence as they looked at the Book of Acts and claimed that since the Church in Acts gives no evidence of organizational structure beyond the local assembly.

The church presently should not have any superstructure whatsoever. There should be no centralized office, no centralized administration for the church at large. Some of these go further. specifically with respect to missions fighting at thirteen verses one and two and they say that the church here the church at Antioch which is specifically in view was but a single congregation in that city it was a single congregation in that city that is very important and it was the single congregation that sent out missionaries remember what’s taking place there Paul and Barnabas are being set apart by the church at Antioch. But in the reading of some, it is a single congregation in Antioch that is operative here, sending out missionaries, thus establishing the pattern for missions forever after. Only individual congregations can send out missionaries. That is what some have concluded. Thus, there can be no boards of missions. There can be no committees for missions. There can be no superstructure, no centralized administration.

And within the Orthodox Presbyterian Church herself, as many of you learned this past Friday night, a movement developed within our denomination in the 30s and 40s called the Penile Movement. That movement cited Paul’s experience in Acts 16. where the Holy Spirit specifically directed his travels. No, not into Asia, not into Bithynia, but over into Macedonia he was to go.

And the Tenilus then said that as Paul was directed in his travels directly by the Holy Spirit, we should expect the promptings of the Holy Spirit with regard to all the particulars of our lives. We have a right to expect the Holy Spirit’s intervention directly into our lives. to that end, and this in keeping with what the Book of Acts specifically prescribes.

And so it goes, and on and on it goes, people appealing to the Book of Acts as normative, in a very special sense with respect to the way in which the church and individual Christians should act, think, and behave in our present circumstance. Groups, movements, entire churches building their cases on a belief that the Book of Acts is in fact then normative and prescriptive. It prescribes for us what our life should be. Now, here we have to take a deep breath, because, of course, it will never do to say that the Book of Acts isn’t normative, since we recognize that this Book of the Bible, like all the books of the Bible, is given by the special inspiration of the Holy Spirit and is an infallible rule for faith and practice.

But this being the case, how then do we justify not rushing after the conclusions of those whose opinions we’ve just outlawed? If, in fact, The Book of Acts is normative and even prescriptive. How do we justify not rushing after the conclusion of those whose opinions we’ve just outlined? Well, first of all, we must keep in mind the full purpose of the Holy Spirit. That person of the Trinity who is so central to this book. We must keep in mind the full purpose of the Holy Spirit.

It is this the writers of the Westminster Confession of Faith were getting at when they The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself, and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture which is not manifold but one, it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.”

Now, the writers of the Confession, by this statement, didn’t have in mind merely the comparative study of texts within the Bible. by which, for instance, they might build their case for a particular doctrine, say, the doctrine of the Trinity. No, they also had in mind the grand sweep of God’s redemptive and revelational program. Not just then a comparative study of individual tasks, But they had in mind the grand sweep of God’s redemptive and revelational program, which comes to bear upon the particular meaning of any test. It is on this basis that they were able, earlier in this document, earlier in the Westminster Confession, to tell us that God’s former ways of revealing his will unto his people have now ceased. That is, God no longer communicates with his people presently as he did in biblical times.

The writers of the Confession were convinced of this And I will add, as have been all others who have confessed historic and orthodox Christianity. I am not going to back down from that. As have been all others who have confessed historic and orthodox Christianity. I think you get my drift. Those who are contending for the continuation of revelation are outside of the boundaries of historic and orthodox Christianity, whether they be Catholic, Protestant, or cultic.

The writers of the Confession were convinced of this God’s four ways of revealing Himself has now ceased. Not because they were able to find that single Bible verse that says as much, but because they were very much alert to the pattern and the progress of God’s grand redemptive and revelational program. To compare Scripture with Scripture, therefore, means more than just stacking Bible verses on top of each other or having the appropriate proof text. It means looking at individual texts in light of the whole of the Word of God. And in the case of further revelations, it means grasping the overall design of God’s Word. by never allowing God’s revelation to be separated from His work of redemption.

And that is the fundamental flaw in the estimations of those who continue to propound a doctrine of continuing revelation. And I am bold I am bold to set before you this morning this statement. The pattern of God’s word bears out this conclusion. God’s mighty acts of redemption have ceased. Are you going to contend to the contrary? Is there going to be another crucifixion? Are you looking for another resurrection of the Son of God? Are you looking for another ascension? Are you looking for another coming of the Holy Spirit?

It’s not going to happen. It won’t happen. God’s mighty acts of redemption have ceased. and His revelation, by which He declares those mighty acts and interprets those mighty acts, have ceased as well. They go together. The Church, therefore, presently lives in and by the record of God’s revelation with respect to His mighty deed, That record preserved for us all uniformly in the Bible. I am bound by this, not by what you imagine God told you at 3 a.m. this morning. The church now lives in and by the record of God’s revelation in the scriptures, not by recent visitations from heavenly beings, not by sightings of the Virgin Mary, not by voices at midnight, not by bleeding statues, not by people speaking in languages that we ordinary Christian folk can’t understand.

So the Book of Acts, yes, is normative, and it is prescriptive, but it is normative and prescriptive within the limits which the Holy Spirit has set for it. The Book of Acts is normative and prescriptive within the limits of its own development. And this is also quite important—within the limits of its own development.

You see, Acts does not give us a fully developed picture of the Church’s life or worship. The Book of Acts is not even interested in what we might call pure definition. What is worship? What is the Christian life? Nor is it a manual on church life. It is not a book of church order.

Instead, it is a book of history, breathing out the dynamics of that history It has in view. And as we read, we watch that history set before us a church which is in development, in process, coming into focus. Things are not settled. Things seemingly are quite liquid. There is development. so that the Church and her order and her life take shape piece by piece as we move through this great biblical book. The Book of Acts, then, yes, is normative, prescriptive, but it is also suggestive of the directions in which the Church will go, in fact, must go.

Let’s take the complicated issue of church governance. Now, you try it. I know I have. You try it. You read through the Book of Acts, and you tell me if you can put together in what you read there a compact clearly defined, well-organized understanding of the government of the Church.

It’s no easy matter. And the reason is, you see, because the Book of Acts is recording the history of the process by which the Church is coming to a maturity, a maturity that even stands beyond what the Book of Acts tells us. We are driven in certain directions. by the book of Acts. All the answers aren’t given to us. For instance, as we look at the book of Acts, along the lines of church government, we notice, first of all, in the early chapters, the church in Jerusalem seems to be overseen by the chosen disciples.

There are eleven of them to begin with. The chair of Judas has been vacated. As you know, Matthias is chosen to sit in that seat. We’re back to twelve, and they are the ones then, these specifically, responsible for the ministerial and the ruling functions that take place within the church. These functions are carried out by the twelve. Then we come to Act VI. The twelve here enlist the aid of seven others. These seven others are ordinarily thought of as the first deacons.

But here’s a wrinkle for you. Here’s a surprise. These so-called deacons do un-deaconly things. I think I just coined a word. undefeatedly things they they end up preaching and teaching. We’ve got Stephen the magnificent fellow who preaches as he does in Act 7 and then we have Philip going out as an evangelist in Act 8. These aren’t the ordinary tasks of so-called deacons.

It seems that the picture is somewhat hazy, somewhat fuzzy, as the offices are somewhat In the center, they’re only coming into focus. It isn’t until the 11th chapter of Acts that we hear any mention of elders within the church. All we hear about the elders of Israel, they’re spoken of repeatedly, but it isn’t until chapter 11, verse 30, that we hear about the elders in the church. And how are we to understand these elders that are spoken of there? These elders in the church of Jerusalem that stand alongside of the apostles.

Do they have ministerial function? Are they ministers of the word alongside of the apostles? Well, that’s one of the questions. It’s not clear. Or do they have simply ruling function? Are they the prototype for the contemporary ruling elder that we honor within the tradition of Presbyterianism? By the time we come to chapter 14, verse 23, we find elders again mentioned here as Paul is determined to appoint elders of all of the churches in the cities that he’s visited on his first missionary journey. Who are these elders? How would we describe them? Are they ministers of the word? Some have concluded that. The interpretation then of elder being broadened, to be sure. Are they that only? We can’t tell. Did they have other functions? It’s not clear to us.

And then we come to Act 20. marvelous chapter that tells us about Paul’s meeting with the elders from Ephesus before he returns to Jerusalem, and once more we are introduced here to the elders that come down to meet him before he goes off to Jerusalem.

But these elders here are specifically spoken of as bishops. Now, if you’re not confused, Amongst those who have been honest in their reading of the book of Acts, you’re the first one. It is a very complicated picture that is being set before you. But by the time we’re done with Acts, it seems that the direction in which we are being pushed with regard to office is along the lines that Presbyterian and Calvinist people at pursuit.

They are the temporary officers. We know about them. We read about the apostles. That’s a temporary officer. We hear about prophets. That also is a temporary officer. But there are these other officers. There are deacons. The responsibility it is to care for the poor, those who need help and assistance. There are those who assist the ministry of the Word. in a ruling capacity supportive of that ministry. There is a ministry of the word that seems to be distinct from the ruling function. This is not to obviate the fact that elders in the book of Acts are also joined together with those who are described as bishops. The force and direction of the record seems to be pushing us towards a three-office point of view. Deacons who serve the poor, administrators, rulers who decide cases, and those to whom is committed specifically the ministry of the Word. And I added this point.

If you think that the tradition of which you are part is not doing very well these days, I suggest to you that this is precisely the pattern of church, government, and order that has been honored in historic Calvinism and Presbyterianism. and he is in place in this congregation. And what might we say about the church as a whole? Again, the picture slowly unfolds. How are we to identify it? It seems the church is all those who gather in Christ’s name in a particular city. That’s what’s set before us.

First of all, as the Christians are gathered together in Jerusalem, Acts 5.11, Acts 8.1, Even though there’s too many of them to gather in one place, so it seems there are multiple congregations in the city of Jerusalem. But this is treated as if it is one church. Then the church is described as such. as those who are gathered together throughout an entire region or seem to be part of or spread out over an entire region. Act 931, the church in Judea and in Galilee and in Samaria. These facts which we note here put before us the connectedness of the church. that carries us beyond the definition of a church as being merely a local assembly. Don’t ever fall for that. Don’t ever fall for that.

The church is not simply the local assembly. A fair reading of the Book of Acts pushes you precisely in the opposite direction because The word church is used to describe not just local congregations, but churches in cities made up of many congregations in entire regions, and then when you get to Acts 20, 28, it seems as if the broadest description of the church possible, the church of God, devolves upon an individual congregation in Ephesus.

Once more, I would say that the pattern that we see evolving in the Book of Acts is precisely the one that has been honored by historic Calvinism and Presbyterianism. The Church is called Church at various levels. I’m not here to suggest to you that Acts 15, which we read this morning, is putting before you the first general assembly of the Church. I’m not that foolish. But the one thing that is obvious from Acts 15 is the interconnectedness of the church. Here is a church court, and I will go so far as to say that about what took place there. And this church court has the right, it seems, to expect that its pronouncements have some effect on congregations elsewhere. As it makes a decision with respect to the whole issue of circumcision, in its relationship to the gospel.

So as I say, it seems the direction, the force of the Book of Acts pushes us towards the conclusions to which Calvinism and historic Presbyterianism have come. Is the Book of Acts normative, prescriptive? No, not in the sense that many wish to make it normative and prescriptive, but yes, of course, just as the Holy Spirit intends. Always according to the overall program of God’s redemptive and revelational purpose, and always according to the internal development of the history which Acts itself records. All of this is confirmation of the things I believe. we hold dear.

So the next time you’re tempted to run off and join a commune, or the pressure is on you to adopt the charismatic and Pentecostal conclusion, or to embrace congregationalism, I hope you’ll draw back If you’ll think again, read the book of Acts, alive to the very spirit who wrote it.

Our Father, who art in heaven, be those who, even though convinced we are right, would brag in ourselves, boast of our own ability and even our own position. For we know that the Lord Jesus Christ extended himself for those whom he loved, and we realize that those whom Christ loved are part of many assemblies and many churches throughout the world. But as he was servant, as he was servant to you for their sakes, for the sake of his people, that they might know the truth. We pray our God that with all humility and with the weakness of Christ, We too may be servants, even to the churches that don’t agree with us. And may we prove to be of help. We ask this, our God, to the end that we all may come to that full maturity.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.