by Richard Barcellos | Apr 20, 2017 | Biblical Worship, New Testament, Worship
This discussion comes from Getting the Garden Right, coming soon from Founders Press. It is used with permission.
Copyright © 2017 Richard C. Barcellos. All rights reserved.
(This is part 6 of 8, click here for part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, part 5, part 6 & part 7)
The Reason for First-Day Meetings in the New Testament (continued)
It is important to recognize that the resurrection is an epoch-changing event. The resurrection is seen as the beginning of the new creation. Believers are united to Christ in his death, burial, and resurrection through faith.
Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin (Rom. 6:3-6)
and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; 12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. (Col. 2:11-12)
Union with Christ brings believers into the orbit of redemptive privilege. They may know “the power of His resurrection” (Phil. 3:10) because they are united to him through faith. God “made us alive together with Christ . . . and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:5-6). Being in Christ makes believers citizens of heaven (Phil. 3:20).
Union with Christ also involves existence in two ages at once—this age (the old creation) and the age to come (the new creation). The age to come is the age of the resurrection.
Jesus said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, 35 but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; 36 for they cannot even die anymore, because they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. (Luke 20:34-36)
Christ’s resurrection is the first bodily resurrection of the age to come because it was “the firstfruits” (1 Cor. 15:20).
But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming (1 Cor. 15:20-23)
Christ’s resurrection was the first of similar resurrections to come. But being “the firstfruits,” it is not totally other than that which follows. It is different in time, but it is part of the same resurrection. It is part of the same harvest, just the first of the much greater harvest to come. Gaffin, commenting on “firstfruits,” says:
The word is not simply an indication of temporal priority. Rather it brings into view Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” of the resurrection-harvest, the initial portion of the whole. His resurrection is the representative beginning of the resurrection of believers. In other words, the term seems deliberately chosen to make evident the organic connection between the two resurrections. In the context, Paul’s “thesis” over against his opponents is that the resurrection of Jesus has the bodily resurrection of “those who sleep” as its necessary consequence. His resurrection is not simply a guarantee; it is a pledge in the sense that it is the actual beginning of the general event. In fact, on the basis of this verse it can be said that Paul views the two resurrections not so much as two events but as two episodes of the same event.[1]
Christ’s resurrection is the most powerful sign of the presence of the age to come. His resurrected body took on qualities it did not possess prior to the resurrection (Rom. 1:4). It was an age-to-come body, existing in this age for a brief time on the earth and now in heaven. In Christ’s resurrection, then, we see the age to come eclipsing this age. This is why Paul says, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new” (2 Cor. 5:17, NKJV). This is not only true of personal renovation but also a state of existence in the new creation brought in by Christ. In Galatians 6:15, Paul says, “For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.”
The age to come has eclipsed this age in the resurrection of Christ. Hebrews 6:5 says that some “have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come.” Waldron says, “The great realities of the age to come have in some sense broken into and become operative in this age.”[2] Waldron’s further comments are helpful at this point:
The New Testament teaches, therefore, that there is a new creation in Christ (Gal. 6:15; 2 Cor. 5:17; Eph. 2:10). The idea of new creation is frequently associated with Christ’s resurrection (cf. Eph. 2:10 with 2:5,7; Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10 with Rom. 6:1-6; Col. 1:15-18). By union with Christ in His death, the old man is destroyed. By union with Christ in His resurrection, the new man is created. When He rose again He became the firstborn of God’s new creation. As He was the beginning of the old creation, so He is now the beginning of the new (Rev. 3:14). Thus, the memorial of Christ’s resurrection is of necessity a memorial of the new creation. Thus, the Lord’s Day like the Sabbath and unlike any other religious observance points to both creation and redemption.[3]
Christ’s resurrection is the apex of all of God’s redemptive work on the earth. It is an epoch-changing event. It ushers in the first phase of the new creation, the last Adam’s entrance into glory. In one sense, it affects everything. But how does it affect the Sabbath under the inaugurated new covenant? That it is the redemptive-historical, theological, and Christological basis for first-day church meetings seems clear. But does it mark the end of all Sabbaths for the people of God? Or does it function as the first creation did in relation to the first Sabbath? Does it function as the basis for the change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day because it is the day Christ ceased from his redemptive work, as God rested from his creative work? Surely, no greater, more unique event could be asked for to change the day of sacred rest for the people of God.
[1] Richard B. Gaffin, Jr., Resurrection and Redemption (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1987), 34-35.
[2] Samuel E. Waldron, The End Times Made Simple (Amityville, NY: Calvary Press, 2003), 49.
[3] Waldron, Lord’s Day.
Dr. Richard Barcellos is associate professor of New Testament Studies. He received a B.S. from California State University, Fresno, an M.Div. from The Master’s Seminary, and a Th.M. and Ph.D. from Whitefield Theological Seminary. Dr. Barcellos is pastor of Grace Reformed Baptist Church, Palmdale, CA. He is author of Trinity & Creation, The Covenant of Works, and Getting the Garden Right. He has contributed articles to various journals and is a member of ETS.
Courses taught for CBTS: New Testament Introduction, Biblical Hermeneutics, Biblical Theology I, Biblical Theology II.
by CBTSeminary | Apr 13, 2017 | Biblical Worship, New Testament, Worship
This discussion comes from Getting the Garden Right, coming soon from Founders Press. It is used with permission.
Copyright © 2017 Richard C. Barcellos. All rights reserved.
(This is part 6 of 8, click here for part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, part 5 & part 6)
The Reason for First-Day Meetings in the New Testament
Finally, consider the reason for first-day meetings in the New Testament. Though it does not state the reason in explicit terms, the New Testament does present enough evidence to provide an answer. The reason for first-day meetings can be none other than the fact and implications of Christ’s first-day resurrection. The resurrection, the pivotal, epoch-changing event in redemptive history, becomes the redemptive-historical and theological basis for first-day meetings in the New Testament. It is seen as an epoch-changing event—the beginning of the new creation. It is also seen as the day in which Christ ceased from his redemptive labors (Heb. 4:9-10).
Schreiner admits that the day of Christ’s resurrection is unique, saying, “Even by stating that it [i.e., the resurrection of Christ] was the first day of the week, the authors assign a special significance to that day.”[1] He then appears to acknowledge that subsequent first days of the week were viewed in a unique way. He says:
We also see hints elsewhere in the NT that the church gathered for worship on the Lord’s Day, the first day of the week (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2; cf. Rev 1:10). Such a practice is most naturally linked to Sunday being the day on which the Lord rose from the dead, though no explicit link is made between the two.[2]
Schreiner identifies church gatherings “for worship on the Lord’s Day, the first day of the week . . . [as] a practice . . . most naturally linked to Sunday being the day on which the Lord rose from the dead.”
Wells makes a similar statement, though with a degree of hesitation not evident in Schreiner:
I have argued that the meeting day of the early church was not fixed by apostolic authority, but by convenience. Nevertheless there might have been a natural preference for the first day of the week. Why? Because our Lord rose from the dead on that day.[3]
Both Schreiner and Wells claim the connection between first-day church meetings and the resurrection of our Lord is a natural one, though Wells does so reluctantly. If one is reminded that the resurrection is a redemptive-historical act of God in Christ, a better word to use to indicate the connection is “theological” instead of “natural.” In other words, the practical implication of the resurrection of our Lord in terms of church gatherings for worship finds its basis in a redemptive-historical reality. It appears Schreiner would agree with this. I do not think Wells does, however. He claims that first-day meetings were “fixed . . . by convenience.” Earlier in his discussion of 1 Corinthians 16:1-2, he says, “If, however, we ask why Paul said, ‘On the first day of every week?’ there is a good chance that he chose that day because the Christians met on that day.”[4] The question we are asking and seeking to answer is why they met on the first day. Wells says it was out of convenience, though he does not argue his case cogently. Then he suggests, “there might have been a natural preference for the first day of the week.” If there is a redemptive-historical reason for first-day meetings, however, it is a theologically revealed basis and does not and cannot change, whether convenient for us or not. If the early Christians met on the basis of convenience, would it not have been less threatening to their well-being to meet on the last day of the week (especially Jewish believers) so as not to draw unwanted and potentially adverse attention to themselves? As will be argued below, the reason for first-day meetings of the church is not based on the mere natural connection between the resurrection of our Lord and first-day meetings. It is, in fact, very redemptive-historical, theological, and even Christological.
Part 8
[1] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 186.
[2] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 186-87.
[3] Wells, The Christian and the Sabbath, 95; emphasis added.
[4] Wells, The Christian and the Sabbath, 95.
CBTS Faculty fully subscribe to the 1689 Confession of Faith, hold an advanced
degree in their field of instruction, and possess significant pastoral experience.
by Richard Barcellos | Mar 24, 2017 | Biblical Worship, New Testament, Worship
This discussion comes from Getting the Garden Right, coming soon from Founders Press. It is used with permission.
Copyright © 2017 Richard C. Barcellos. All rights reserved.
(This is part 4 of 8, click here for part 1, part 2 & part 3)
The Prominence of the First Day Immediately Subsequent to Christ’s Resurrection
Notice the prominence of the first day immediately subsequent to Christ’s resurrection.
Matt. 28:1 Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave.
Matt. 28:5-6 The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. 6 “He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said. Come, see the place where He was lying.
Matt. 28:9-10 And behold, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they came up and took hold of His feet and worshiped Him. 10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and take word to My brethren to leave for Galilee, and there they will see Me.”
Mark 16:9 Now when he rose early in the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene
Mark 16:12 After that, he appeared in another form to two of them as they walked and went into the country.
Mark 16:14 Afterward he appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table”
Luke 24:1-2 Now on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they, and certain other women with them, came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared. But they found the stone rolled away from the tomb.
Luke 24:13-15 Now behold, two of them were traveling that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was seven miles from Jerusalem. And they talked together of all these things which had happened. So it was, while they conversed and reasoned, that Jesus himself drew near and went with them.
Luke 24:36 Now as they said these things, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, “Peace to you.”
These post-resurrection appearances of Christ all happened on the first day of the week. How can we best account for this? Waldron comments on this phenomenon:
(1) We note first the phrase in John 20:26, “eight days later”. Since the Jews counted inclusively, this eighth day was the first day of the week. John is careful to include these details of time because they point to his Lord’s Day theology (Rev. 1:10). In fact, four of the eight New Testament references to the first or Lord’s Day are in the Johannine literature of the New Testament (John 20:1,19,26; Rev. 1:10). John 20:26 increases strikingly in its significance when it is compared with John 21:14. There the appearance beside the Sea of Tiberias is said to be “the third time that Jesus was manifested to His disciples.” This statement is, of course, problematic and must be qualified in some fashion. Whatever its specific meaning, it clearly marks the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus of John 20:19, 20:26, and 21:1 as unique and distinct. There were no intervening appearances of like character. Probably the meaning is that Jesus between these three appearances did not appear to a large group of disciples (Apostles). This means, of course, that between the first and eighth days of John 20 there were no like appearances to the disciples. This fact must have had a psychological effect upon the gathered disciples which would have clearly marked the first day of the week as of special significance for their resurrected Lord.
(2) Acts 2:1f. is also significant because the day of Pentecost occurred upon the first day of the week (Lev. 23:15-21). Pentecost, it is interesting to note was a day upon which no laborious work was to be done. Thus, it was in a sense a Sabbath. At any rate, the two constitutive events of the New Covenant and New Creation (the resurrection of Christ and the Pentecostal giving of the Spirit) both occurred on the first day of the week. Surely the disciples of Christ could not have overlooked or failed to ponder these facts.[1]
Though these observations of themselves do not prove that the first day of the week is the Christian sacred day for church worship, taken together with the many other issues we have discussed and will discuss below, they indicate that something is very unique about the first day of the week even after Christ rose from the dead. In other words, the New Testament notes recurring first days after the resurrection of Christ. These post-resurrection and pre-ascension appearances seem to assume something peculiar about the first day of the week. Just what that peculiarity is demands further revelation.
Part 5
[1] Waldron, Lord’s Day.
Dr. Richard Barcellos is associate professor of New Testament Studies. He received a B.S. from California State University, Fresno, an M.Div. from The Master’s Seminary, and a Th.M. and Ph.D. from Whitefield Theological Seminary. Dr. Barcellos is pastor of Grace Reformed Baptist Church, Palmdale, CA. He is author of Trinity & Creation, The Covenant of Works, and Getting the Garden Right. He has contributed articles to various journals and is a member of ETS.
Courses taught for CBTS: New Testament Introduction, Biblical Hermeneutics, Biblical Theology I, Biblical Theology II.
by Richard Barcellos | Mar 22, 2017 | Biblical Worship, New Testament, Worship
This discussion comes from Getting the Garden Right, coming soon from Founders Press. It is used with permission.
Copyright © 2017 Richard C. Barcellos. All rights reserved.
(This is part 3 of 8, click here for part 1 & part 2)
Now notice what Luke records in Acts 6:2-4:
So the twelve summoned the congregation of the disciples and said, “It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables. 3 “Therefore, brethren, select from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may put in charge of this task. 4 “But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” (Acts 6:2-4)
The “ministry of the word” most likely refers to the message preached, the things proclaimed by the apostles. This is, in fact, the ministry of the word of God. This is confirmed for us in 1 Thessalonians 2:13.
For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe. (1 Thess. 2:13)
Kruger comments on this text as follows:
Paul emphasizes that the apostolic message borne by the apostles was to be received as the authoritative word of God . . . Although this message was certainly passed along orally by the apostles, it is clear that Paul expected his written letters to bear the same weight as his words spoken in the Thessalonians’ presence. Second Thessalonians 2:15 says, “Stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.” It is difficult to imagine that the Thessalonians would have understood Paul’s letters in any other way than as the authoritative apostolic message that demanded their submission and obedience.[1]
The apostles realized their message was God’s message in light of the sufferings and glory of our Lord. It was God’s message through them, something communicated by Christ in them by virtue of the promise and ministry of the Spirit. Our Lord had prepared them to expect this.
The following words by the Lord to the disciples prior to his death and resurrection apply to them in a unique way as apostles.
These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you. 26 “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you. (John 14:25-26)
When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me, 27 and you will testify also, because you have been with Me from the beginning. (John 15:26-27)
“But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. 14 “He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you. 15 “All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He takes of Mine and will disclose it to you. (John 16:13-15)
These promises set the background for the apostolic ministry. The apostolic ministry includes both speaking and writing on behalf of Christ in fulfillment of these very words.
The apostles have left the church with what has been termed apostolic tradition. These apostolic traditions were first spoken by the apostles and then written for us in the New Testament. This means that some things done by the early churches prior to the writing of the New Testament were based on the authoritative spoken word of the apostles (e.g., the Lord’s Supper in Corinth [1 Cor. 10 and 11]; the presence and function of teachers of the word in Galatia [Gal. 6:6]; the presence and function of overseers and deacons in Philippi [Phil. 1:1]; and the presence and function of laborers who oversee and instruct in Thessalonica [1 Thess. 5:12-13]). It is important to note, as Kruger asserts, the authoritative tradition that the New Testament speaks of is not human tradition or ecclesiastical tradition, but apostolic tradition.[2] It is also important to realize that what was first spoken was subsequently written and canonized. As Kruger acknowledges:
Although this apostolic tradition was initially delivered orally as the apostles preached, taught, and visited churches (2 Thess. 2:15), it very soon began to be preserved and passed along in written form. Of course, this transition did not happen all at once—oral apostolic tradition and written apostolic tradition would have existed side by side for a period of time.[3]
In sum, the New Testament documents can be understood as the written expression of the authoritative, foundational, and eyewitness tradition delivered by the apostles of Jesus Christ.[4]
Oral apostolic tradition is assumed and further explicated by written apostolic tradition.
What does the discussion above about apostolic tradition have to do with the fact that Christ rose from the dead on the first day of the week? The resurrection of our Lord is not left as a self-interpreting act of God. Its theological and practical implications were brought to the early church by the apostles via both oral and written apostolic tradition. Though we do not necessarily possess the oral apostolic tradition in the exact words in which it was first delivered, the written assumes the oral and builds upon it. This being the case, if the New Testament indicates that the church met on the first day for public worship (i.e., practice), that it did so due to the first-day resurrection of our Lord (i.e., redemptive-historical basis), and that this practice was approved by an apostle or apostles (i.e., authoritative approval), is it too difficult to conclude that first-day meetings of the church for worship were also ordained by Christ through the apostles (i.e., dominical and apostolic sanction)? Just as the Book of Acts and the Epistles do not command the Lord’s Supper to be instituted, neither do they command the churches to meet on the first day of the week. Just as the Lord’s Supper is assumed by the Epistles, so the Lord’s Day is assumed as well. The churches addressed in the New Testament, and the things they practiced, existed prior to letters being written to them. As we shall see in our discussion of 1 Corinthians 16:1-2, first-day church meetings at Corinth are assumed to be in place, just as the Lord’s Supper is assumed to be in place, and both prior to the writing of 1 Corinthians. The importance of the discussion on apostolic tradition will become more evident in the discussion which follows.
Part 4
[1] Kruger, Canon Revisited, 186-87; emphasis original.
[2] See Kruger, Canon Revisited, 177. As understood and explained by Kruger, apostolic tradition is categorically different from Roman Catholic tradition.
[3] Kruger, Canon Revisited, 179.
[4] Kruger, Canon Revisited, 181.
Dr. Richard Barcellos is associate professor of New Testament Studies. He received a B.S. from California State University, Fresno, an M.Div. from The Master’s Seminary, and a Th.M. and Ph.D. from Whitefield Theological Seminary. Dr. Barcellos is pastor of Grace Reformed Baptist Church, Palmdale, CA. He is author of Trinity & Creation, The Covenant of Works, and Getting the Garden Right. He has contributed articles to various journals and is a member of ETS.
Courses taught for CBTS: New Testament Introduction, Biblical Hermeneutics, Biblical Theology I, Biblical Theology II.
