by R.L.B.

The Recovery of Dispensational Truth

The View that 'The Church' and the Present Dispensation Began at Pentecost

        Bible study from a dispensational point of view was popularized by the recovery of some features of dispensational bible truth in the 1800's by scholars like John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), William Kelly (1820-1906), Charles. H. Mackintosh (1820-1896), F. W. Grant (1834-1902), and more recently by Cyrus I. Scofield (1843-1921), F. C. Jennings (1847-1948), Louis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952) and others.  These men placed the beginning of 'the church' at the day of Pentecost, (i.e., the Old Testament Feast of Weeks), when God poured out His Spirit on the twelve apostles and on other believers assembled that day (Acts 2:1-4).

        J. N. Darby, (1800 - 1882), is credited by many with recovering the foundations of the largely forgotten body of truth known as "dispensationalism."  A recent television broadcast on "The History Channel" puts this in prospective.  Judging by the 'expert opinions' expressed on the program, the producers of the TV production are decidedly unsympathetic to the biblical concept of dispensational truth.  We, of course, totally disagree with the History Channel's conclusions that dispensational truth is a recent invention of man, that man being J. N. Darby.  Many features of biblical truth were lost very early in the history of the church, including the truth of justification by faith, the character of the local and universal church, and dispensational truth.  These concepts, however, have been in the Bible from day one for all to accept.  The fact that Huss, Luther and others rediscovered many generally ignored biblical doctrines, such as the truth of justification by faith without works, does not mean the doctrine of salvation by God-given faith alone was invented by those reformers.  So with dispensational truth.  Although others before Darby may have begun to understand portions of this system, Darby was certainly instrumental in beginning the process of recovering it, systematizing it, and popularizing it.  The History Channel program made the following observations:

Narrator:  But this gripping end-time scenario [of the rapture and the great tribulation] is not a twenty-first century evangelical invention.  And perhaps more surprisingly, academics don’t believe it’s a first century concept either.

Dr. Segal:    It comes from nineteenth century, and early twentieth century protestant evangelical preaching which connected together a number of separate scenes in the New Testament and came up with what is essentially a new myth about the end of time.

Narrator:  This influential form of biblical interpretation is called dispensationalism.  It was the brain child primarily of one man, John Nelson Darby, a nineteenth century British evangelist.

Dr. Weber:  John Nelson Darby’s teachings, were called dispensationalism because he divided the bible into various eras or dispensations he called them.  And he believed that God had worked with humanity in different ways in each dispensation to bring them along in this redemptive process.

Narrator:  Darby’s innovation amounted to a biblical super-system, a way to read Scripture that unified disparate texts and in particular incorporated difficult apocalyptic books like Daniel and Revelation which were often ignored in mainstream protestant churches. . . .   Dispensationalism caught on quickly in America.

Dr. Weber:   And between 1880 and 1940 there were literally dozens of these bible institutes formed all over the country.  And almost without exception, dispensationalism was the perspective taught in those bible institutes, which put out hundreds and thousands, over the years, of pastors and missionaries and Christian educators.  (The Antichrist, Part II, The History Channel) 

(Above contributors were:  Alan F. Segal, PhD., Professor of Religion, Barnard College, and Timothy Weber, PhD., Author, On the Road to Armageddon)

Darby's ministry took him on multiple trips from Great Britain to France, Germany, Canada, and the United States.

        Regarding the differences between "prophecy" and the "privilege of the church," Darby wrote:

John Nelson Darby

Prophecy applies itself properly to the earth;  its object is not heaven.  It was about things that were to happen on the earth; and the not seeing this has misled the church.  We have thought that we ourselves had within us the accomplishment of these earthly blessings, whereas we are called to enjoy heavenly blessings.  The privilege of the church is to have its portion in the heavenly places;  and later blessings will be shed forth upon the earthly people.  The church is something altogether apart -- a kind of heavenly economy, during the rejection of the earthly people, who are put aside on account of their sins, and driven out among the nations, out of the midst of which nations God chooses a people for the enjoyment of heavenly glory with Jesus Himself.  The Lord, having been rejected by the Jewish people, is become wholly a heavenly person.  This is the doctrine which we peculiarly find in the writings of the apostle Paul.  It is no longer the Messiah of the Jews, but a Christ exalted, glorified;  and it is for want of taking hold of this exhilarating truth, that the church has become so weak.  (The Hopes of the Church of God, In Connection With the Destiny of the Jews and the Nations as Revealed in Prophecy, The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby, Vol. 2, p. 376, [1840] )

The calling of God for the earth is never transferred to the nations;  it remains with the Jews.  If I want an earthly religion, I ought to be a Jew.  From the instant that the church loses sight of its heavenly calling, it loses, humanly speaking, all. (Op cit, p. 378)

The body or membership of the body forms no part of Peter's revelation.  Nor does he speak of the Church or assembly at all.  Let us now turn to Paul.  He is full upon this question.  He was a minister of the Church to fulfil or complete the word of God.  Hence the doctrine of the Church as the body of Christ is fully developed by him.  (The Church--The House and the Body, The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby, Vol. 14, p. 97 [1867] )

As to the 'birthday' of the church, Darby identified this day as Pentecost.

In the Ephesians, however, when the body is fully spoken of, the apostle refers to the elect saints, who are created again in Christ Jesus, and are sealed for the day of redemption;  that is, united to the Head, as God knows it;  quickened, raised, and seated in heavenly places in Christ the Head.  That which has wrought this unity is the baptism of the Holy Ghost, under which the elect and manifested remnant were brought on the day of Pentecost. (The House of God; The Body of Christ; and the Baptism of the Holy Ghost, The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby, Vol. 14, pp. 24-25, [1860] )

Even in the mid 1800's Darby recognized that God continued to actively deal with the nation Israel until the point when they were "shut up" at the great dispensational milestone of Acts 28:28.

If we trace the actual order of church history in the Acts, we shall find the breaking up and scattering of the central and only church of Jerusalem by the death of Stephen, gone to Jesus — and then the church on earth scattered;  thereon Saul called for, an entirely new instrument to Gentiles, rulers, and the people of Israel;  and thereon the union of the church with Jesus in heaven for the first time mentioned, "Why persecutest thou me?"  but after this (though the principle of Paul's mission and the union of the church with Jesus was established), the patience of God continuing to work by the ministration of Peter . . . the calling of the Gentiles is by his mouth, that the witness of the Jewish stock might still be preserved in grace . . . and thereon extraordinary intervention might effect besides in one born out of due time, the witness of prerogative grace in the disorder of the dispensation as to man.  We find the lingering traces of habitual evil in the saints, for they objected to Peter his having gone to the Gentiles;  yet this was the final sin of the Jews.  Such was the patience of God, that they were not, historically, then shut up, till Paul's intercourse with them at Rome (Acts 28).  (Footnote to Notes on the Revelation, The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby, Vol. 2, p. 176 [1839])

It is when the enmity [of man] has arrived at its height, that He says, "Make the heart of this people fat" (Isaiah 6:10):  but it is not until nearly eight hundred years after (Acts 28:27), that we find the accomplishment of this judgment pronounced so long before by the prophet.  It was when the people had rejected everything, that God hardened them, to make them a monument of His ways.  What patience on the part of God!  (The Hopes of the Church of God, In Connection With the Destiny of the Jews and the Nations as Revealed in Prophecy, Lecture 9, The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby, Vol. 2, p. 362 [1840] )

        Darby recognized that Acts 28:28 marked the temporary end of God's offer of the millennial kingdom to Israel.  He did not, however, appear to have fully grasped the logical implications of that truth insofar as it contrasts the characteristics of the church which existed before Acts 28:28 with those which characterized it after Acts 28:28.

       C. H. Mackintosh, (1820 - 1896), was a teacher in the so-called "Plymouth Brethren" movement along with J. N. Darby.  He was the beloved author of numerous books, such as his six volume set of notes on the Pentateuch and several volumes of Miscellaneous Writings.  C.H.M. said the following regarding the essential characteristics of the church:

Charles H. Mackintosh

 In Matt. xvi., we have the very earliest allusion to the Church, and there our Lord speaks of it as a future thing.  He says, "On this rock I will build My Church."  He does not say, "I have been, or I am building."  In short the Church had no existence until our Lord Christ was raised from the dead and glorified at the right hand of God.  Then, but not until then, the Holy Ghost was sent down to baptise believers, whether Jews or Gentiles, into one body, and unite them to the risen and glorified Head in heaven.  This body has been on the earth since the descent of the Holy Ghost; is here still, and shall be until Christ comes to fetch it to Himself.  It is a perfectly unique thing.  It is not to be found in Old Testament Scripture.  Paul expressly tells us it was not revealed in other ages;  it was hid in God, and never made known until it was committed to him.  (See, carefully, Rom. xvi. 25, 26; Eph. iii. 3-11; Col. i. 24-27) . . .  The termini of the Church's earthly history are Pentecost (Acts ii.), and the rapture (1 Thess. iv. 16, 17).  ( C. H. Mackintosh, Footnote in The Assembly of God, pp. 18 - 19)

Thus, C.H.M. believed there were several prerequisites that had to be met before "the church" could be formed.

• It was still future at Matthew 16:18

• It must begin after Christ's resurrection

• It must begin after His ascension and glorification

• It would begin when the Holy Spirit was sent down to baptize believers.

C.H.M identified this 'church' at Acts 2 as "the body of Christ," and taught that believers from Pentecost onward were members of that body of Christ.  At the same time he states that "the Church" was never mentioned in the Old Testament.  The truth of "the Church" was hidden in God, and remained hidden until revealed to and through the apostle Paul.  While we think C.H.M. was beginning to be on the right track, we do take issue with his apparent understanding that what he calls "the Church" was a static entity from Pentecost onward to today.  We shall address this misconception shortly.

        Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843 - 1921), was a congregational minister, who is probably best remembered for his 1909 dispensational and premillennial Scofield Reference Bible.  He was also author of a dispensational Bible course, and of other writings.  Many of his dispensational conclusions were similar to those of J. N. Darby.  In fact, the system he taught has sometimes been referred to as the "Darby - Scofield" position.  We present here a very small sampling of his writings, having to do with the subject of the present dispensation and the birthday of "the church."

C. I. Scofield

Further, Scripture shows the student that neither Israel nor the church always existed; each had a recorded beginning. The beginning of Israel he finds in the call of Abram. Looking then for the birth of the church he finds (contrary, perhaps, to his expectations, for he has probably been taught that Adam and the patriarchs are in the church) that it certainly did not exist before, nor during, the earth life of Christ, for he finds Him speaking of His church as yet future when He says (Matt. 16:18), "Upon this rock I will build my church." Not, have built, nor am building, but will build.

He finds, too, from Ephesians 3:5-10, that the church is not once mentioned in Old Testament prophecy, but was, in those ages, a mystery "hid in God." Scripturally, he finds the birth of the church in Acts 2, and the termination of its career on the earth in I Thessalonians 4.  (C. I. Scofield, Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth, Chapter 1, The Jew, the Gentile, and the Church of God).

       In the above quotation, Scofield cites Ephesians 3:5-10 as the basis of his position, that what he terms "the church" was never mentioned in the Old Testament, and had its birth in Acts 2, {on the day of Pentecost).  Scofield, like C. H. Mackintosh, treats this "church" as a static organization and applies "the mystery" of Ephesians 3 to that "church" throughout it's historical manifestation, from it's inception at Pentecost to the present time.  However, he does appear to depart from the Darby-Mackintosh position by stating that the "sixth dispensation", began not at Pentecost, but at the cross:

Man under grace. The sacrificial death of the Lord Jesus Christ introduced the dispensation of pure grace, which means undeserved favor, or God giving righteousness, instead of God requiring righteousness, as under law. Salvation, perfect and eternal, is now freely offered to Jew and Gentile upon the acknowledgment of sin, or repentance, with faith in Christ.  (C. I. Scofield, Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth, Chapter 2, The Seven Dispensations).

        Lewis Sperry Chafer, (1871-1952), who authored his eight volume Systematic Theology, held a position very similar position to that of Darby, Scofield and Mackintosh as to when the church began.  Like them he also believed "the Church" was the "mystery" cited by Paul in Ephesians 3:3-6:

Lewis Sperry Chafer

 The word church is not found in the Old Testament because of the fact that the Church did not then exist, and being a mystery or sacred secret of the New Testament (Eph. 3:3-6), it is not even a subject of Old Testament prophecy.  [It is used but] once in a prophecy by Christ of the true Church which was yet to be formed (Matt. 16:18).  The true Church could not have existed until Christ died; for she must be redeemed by His blood (Eph. 5:25-27).  The true Church could not have existed until His resurrection; for she partakes of His resurrection life, and she is the harvest of which He, in resurrection, is the "Firstfruits" in the New Creation.  The true Church could not have existed until His ascension; for He must first become "head over all things to the church."  Likewise, the true Church could not exist until the advent of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost; for she can be formed only by the present ministry of the Spirit in baptizing all members into one body and causing them to drink into one Spirit (1 Cor. 12:14).  Therefore we turn to the Epistles for the unfolding of the doctrine of the Church.  This revelation was given to the Apostle Paul (Eph. 3:3-6), as before stated, and is set forth by him particularly in the Ephesian and Colossian letters.  (Lewis Sperry Chafer, Major Bible Themes, The Church: Her Membership, p. 205-206.)

Mid-Acts Dispensational Positions

        The forgoing Bible teachers believed that God's company of believers (the ekklesia or 'church') began on the day of Pentecost, which is the Old Testament 'Feast of Weeks" and that this particular 'church' is the same church which is in existence today.  In addition, it appears that all, with the possible exception of C. I. Scofield, believed that the present dispensation also began at the day of Pentecost and continues today.  (Scofield indicated that the present dispensation began at the cross).

        Thus, dispensational Bible knowledge, initially recovered and systematized by John Nelson Darby, became relatively standardized, both within the so-called Brethren movement and to the non-reformed evangelical community throughout the world.  There were other Bible researchers, however, who concluded that advances could be made in this branch of study which could shed light on some problems which they felt were inherent in the original format.

Ethelbert W. Bulling

       In the late 1800s Dr. Ethelbert W. Bullinger, (1837 - 1913), along with Darby and others, came to realize the distinctive roll the apostle Paul played in revealing to God's people what Bullinger termed 'church truth,' as opposed to 'kingdom truth.'  Bullinger was editor of "Things to Come" magazine, and prolific author of many scholarly and helpful works including A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament (1877), and his ground-breaking and exhaustive work on Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (1898).  His most outstanding achievement, however, was The Companion Bible, of which he was primary editor.  Bullinger attempted to take a fresh look at the Scriptures, believing that to many, Bible doctrines had become like creeds which are repeated without really understanding the basis of their truth.

Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Darby, and Newton would be surprised to-day to find that those who question what they believed are treated as guilty of presumption, and of a sin to be visited with excommunication!  These good men little thought that the inferences which they drew from the Bible would be raised to a position of almost equality with the Bible itself.  (E. W. Bullinger, How to Enjoy the Bible, Introduction, p.xv, 1907)

Bullinger attempted to be as consistent as possible in applying dispensational concepts to the various topics of Bible study, such as the second coming of Christ, law & grace, kingdom & church, etc.  Bullinger's dispensational positions varied widely as he struggled to consistently interpret Scripture.  For example, in his relatively early book The Church Epistles he does not at all discuss the time of the inception of "the church."  However, he does lump together Paul's letters to the seven churches, thus indicating his belief that "the church" must have begun sometime before Paul wrote his first epistle to those churches.  But, he goes a step further.  In a discussion of Hebrews 13:13 regarding "the camp" Bullinger said the following, cryptically implying (if I read him correctly) that "the church" may have begun at Pentecost:

Paul, in the epistle to the church of God at Corinth, shews also that the church up to that time was the antitype of the Camp in the wilderness. [see 1 Cor. 10:1-2, 6, & 11 - Ed].  So Scripture teaches us in the plainest language possible that the Camp spoken of in Heb. xiii. 13 is not Israel as a nation, but the company of believers in the apostles' day, as seen in the "Acts of the Apostles," in association with Jerusalem and endued with visible power from on high. . . .  The deliverance of Peter, first from the high priest, and afterwards from Herod, with the death of Herod, and the deliverance of Paul at Philippi, shew that the believers were one Camp, whether at Jerusalem or among the Gentiles, wherever any were gathered to the name of the Lord Jesus, so long as the patience of God lingered over Jerusalem and the things that pertained to the kingdom of God were the subject of the apostles' preaching.  While this continued the Gentiles were brought into the Camp by the ceremonial purification, the washing of the flesh in water, when God had purified their hearts through faith (Acts x. 47 and xv. 9).  (E. W. Bullinger, The Church Epistles, p. 180-181)

In a later writing, however, Bullinger stated that the present dispensation began with the apostle Paul during his early ministry.

This Dispensation . . . commenced outwardly by the ministry of Paul, in the Dispensation or administration committed formally to him. (E. W. Bullinger, How to Enjoy the Bible, p. 95)

As to the Lord's declaration in Matthew 16:15-19: regarding the future ekklesia which He would build, Bullinger said the following:

On Him, the Messiah, His Ecclesia or Assembly, spoken of in the Prophets, would yet be built.  "I will build" are His words.  "I will call" are Jehovah's words in Hosea: "I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.  And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people: there shall they be called the children of the living God.  Isaiah also crieth CONCERNING ISRAEL, though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, A REMNANT SHALL BE SAVED" (Rom. ix. 25-27).

This Remnant is the Ecclesia mentioned by the Lord in Matt. xvi. 18.

The gates of hell will strive against it, as Rom. ix. 29 testifies, but the remnant shall be saved.  This future Ecclesia of Israel is to be built UPON Christ, the Messiah, as the Foundation Stone.

The Church of God is now a spiritual building IN Christ: but the Ecclesia of Matt. xvi. 18 is the future, corporate, saved "remnant" of Israel.

The special usage of this word Ecclesia, in this Present Dispensation, by the Holy Spirit was not known until it was revealed to Paul as the Secret (or Mystery) which had been "hid in God" (Eph. iii. 9); "hid from ages and from generations" (Col. i. 26); "kept secret since the world began" (Rom. xvi. 25).   (Op cit, p. 147-149)

Bullinger considered the book of Acts as 'transitional' in nature.  And here he himself seemed to be in 'transition' as to his understanding of the dispensational nature of the Acts.  For example, he wrote:

Up to Acts xxviii, Peter's offer of the kingdom (Acts iii, 19-21, R.V.) was still open.

Not until Acts xxviii, 25, 26 was Paul commissioned to pronounce this threatened judicial blindness, for the third, and last time.

It is obvious that not until after Acts xxviii, could any declaration of the Mystery have been made.  Until then nothing could be said which would be incompatible with the possible acceptance of Peter's offer. (Op cit, p. 178-179)

But although he recognized Acts 28 as an important dispensational marker, he (in 1907) seemed not to understand the full implications of that marker.  For example, his book How to Enjoy the Bible avoids discussing the birthday of the present day church.  So while Bullinger, at this time, took a 'mid-Acts' position with regard to the beginning of the present dispensation, it is not entirely clear whether he also took a 'mid-Acts' position as to the birthday of the church.  Later in his ministry, as we shall see, Bullinger emphatically denied that "the church" began at Pentecost. 

John C. O'Hair

Cornelius R. Stam

         Cornelius R. Stam, (1908 - 2003), was the former editor of The Berean Searchlight, and late president of the Berean Bible Society.  Although he was an early member of the GGF, certain issues prompted him to form a rival organization in 1967 known as the Berean Bible Fellowship.  Stam specifically placed the birthday of the church at the conversion of Saul of Tarsus in Acts 9.  Stam says the following in his commentary on the Acts: 

THE PENTECOSTAL CHURCH  --  In this passage [Acts 2:42-47] we find the first  mention of "the church" in Acts.  This fact has been used to support the traditional view that the church of this age (the Body of Christ) had its historical beginning at Pentecost -- that Pentecost was "the birthday of the Church."  This is one of the great blunders which has caused such confusion and division among God's people today.  (Cornelius. R. Stam, Acts--Dispensationally Considered, Vol. 1, p. 116)

Expressing his view that the birthday of the church and the beginning of the present dispensation were simultaneous occurrences, Stam goes on to say:

[Paul's] conversion marked the beginning of the new dispensation . . . of grace.  (Op cit Vol. 2, p. 17)  [The reader is encouraged to refer to Stam's five specific proofs of his position, pp. 176-180.]

Charles F. Baker

         Charles F. Baker, (1905 - 1994), was an important organizer of the GGF.   A graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, he edited the Biblegram and also Truth magazine beginning with the magazine's inception in 1950. He also founded the Milwaukee Bible Institute (now Grace Bible College of Grand Rapids, MI) in 1939, serving as its president for 29 years. He is the author of numerous books dealing with dispensational themes.  He, along with a majority of GGF members, believed that both the church and the present dispensation began, not at Acts 9 at the conversion of Saul, but with the commencement of Paul's ministry (as commended by the church at Antioch) in Acts 13.

        To promote unity between the two camps within the GGF, (i.e., between those who hold an Acts 9 position and those who hold an Acts 13 position), the "Grace Gospel Fellowship," adopted the following less specific doctrinal statement:

In the present dispensation there is only one true Church, which is called the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13; Eph. 1:22, 23; 3:6). The historical manifestation of the Body of Christ began with the Apostle Paul before he wrote his first epistle (1 Thess. 2:14-16 cf. Acts 13:45, 46; Phil. 1:5, 6 cf. Acts 16; 1 Cor. 12:13, 27 cf. Acts 18) - (Doctrinal statement of the Grace Gospel Fellowship)

        One of the implications of the view that a 'new church' was born at Acts 9, or Acts 13, is that 'two bodies,' or 'two distinct churches,' (a Pentecostal kingdom church, and the church known as 'Christ's body'), must have coexisted side-by-side after the 'new church' began.  This view has been held by many dispensational teachers, including a dear brother this writer was once privileged to know, the late Ike T. Sidebottom (1897 - 1970), former editor of The Timely Messenger, and pastor of "The Church at 615 College Avenue" in Fort Worth, Texas, from 1929 to 1965.  More recently Dr. W. Edward Bedore, Executive Director of the Berean Bible Institute, an arm of the Berean Bible Society, expressed this view in an article in The Berean Searchlight, a 'mid-Acts' publication.

The foregoing list of things that took place following Paul's conversion provides compelling evidence that there was a major departure from the prophecy program at that time.  God dispensed grace instead of wrath.  This unprophesied dispensing of grace initiated a new Church, the Body of Christ, which over the next several years would grow even as the existing Kingdom Church would wither and finally die out. - (W. Edward Bedore, The Practical Beginning of the Body of Christ, in The Berean Searchlight, February 2006, p. 20)

        Dr. Bedore believes, along with many mid-Acts teachers, and with many Acts 28 dispensationalists, that the Scriptures teach a new ekklesia (church, assembly, or gathering) was born at the precise historical time that the present dispensation was manifested, whether that time was Acts 9, Acts 13 or after Acts 28:28.  In the case of the mid-Acts systems, this requires the problematic theory that 'two bodies' simultaneously existed during the Acts, as stated by Dr. Bedore (above).  As just one example of the difficulties created by this approach, the Acts 9 system  holds, for example, that when Saul of Tarsus initially believed the gospel, he became the first member of the ekklesia known as the "Body of Christ," yet he was baptized with water, an ordinance believed by many mid-Acts dispensationalists to be a 'kingdom ceremony.'  Moreover, Ananias, who baptized Saul, was undoubtedly part of the Acts 2 ('kingdom') church.  Thus we have someone in the 'old' church baptizing someone into an entirely different, 'new,' church, with a water ceremony which mid-Acts dispensationalists teach has no part in the present dispensation.

        It is our feeling that some dispensationalists simply take for granted that the historical beginning of the present "church" must necessarily coincide with the establishment of the present dispensation, whether that timeframe is Acts 9, Acts 13, after Acts 28:28, or during the second imprisonment of Paul.  Many assume a new church would necessarily have to be born, or "initiated," at the time God, in His sovereign wisdom, introduces a new administration, or dispensation.   For example, when Israel's opposition to their Messiah became irrevocable, God initiated the present, (new) dispensation, and, the theory says, this new dispensation could not be compatible with the church already in existence, so God must have created a 'new and distinct church' that was consistent with His new dispensation.  More on this theory later.

The Acts 28:28 Position

        In England, in the early 1900s, after discussions with a young man, Charles H. Welch , the aforementioned Dr. E. W. Bullinger, became convinced that his previously held 'mid-Acts' position was inconsistent with the occurrences of kingdom miracles and signs in the Acts and earlier Pauline epistles, and their complete absence in the 'prison epistles.'  Although the majority of Bullinger's writings reflect his earlier 'mid-Acts' position, his final writings adopt a firm Acts 28:28 position which held that both the birthday of the present day church, the body of Christ, and the beginning of the present dispensation, followed the significant dispensational boundary line at Acts 28:28.

Before we take up the Prison Epistles, written after Acts xxviii, 29, 30, it is absolutely necessary that we should have a very clear understanding of the great dividing line which separates the earlier from the later Pauline Epistles.

In order to gain this understanding we must have a clear view of the scope and design of the Acts of the Apostles as being a Dispensation characterised by CONCLUDING ISRAEL'S BIBLICAL HISTORY.

Of no book of Scripture has the key been more effectually lost, or more difficult to recover.  The eyes of Christendom have been blinded by the tradition, originated by the Popes of Rome, that "Jesus Christ came on earth to found a church, and that He gave the keys to Peter, and Peter gave them to the Pope."  This, or the milder and more modern form of expression, "The Church began at Pentecost," is the root of all the darkness, which, like a thick veil, hides the truth from the churches to this very day.

Through the unfortunate translation of ekklesia by "church" in Matt. xvi. 18, instead of "assembly" or "congregation" (as in the Old Testament), the Romish and Protestant figments have brought forth the pernicious fruit that, in the Acts of the Apostles, we have the formation of "the Christian Church." - (E. W. Bullinger, The Foundations of Dispensational Truth, p. 182)

        Charles H. Welch, (1880 - 1967), continued his own ministry as editor of The Berean Expositor, which commenced publication in 1909.  He also organized 'The Berean Forward Movement.'  The author of the paper you are now reading met Mr. Welch during his visit to the United States in 1955.  Brother Welch has consistently held to an Acts 28:28 dispensational position.  Regarding Pentecost he said:

Charles H. Welch

It is practically a "fundamental" that "The church began at Pentecost."  This consensus of opinion has wrought havoc among the people of God.  It has been the foundation of much of the "gifts" and "tongues" movements, "faith healing," and the many sects and splits that go to form Christendom.  We unhesitatingly challenge this hoary tradition, and seek to show by the Word itself that Pentecost has nothing whatever to do with the "church," but like "Matthew," and the earthly ministry of the Lord Jesus, is a continuation of the gospel of the kingdom, related to Abrahamic and Davidic promises, hopes, and people. (Charles H. Welch, Dispensational Truth: or the Place of Israel and the Church in the Purpose of the Ages, p. 137)

"When does a dispensation begin?"  The question is important because of its bearing upon the claims of Acts twenty-eight, or of Acts thirteen, to be the beginning of the dispensation of the Mystery, and of the Church which is the One Body. . . .  Paul received the dispensation of the grace of God by revelation when he became the Prisoner of Jesus Christ for us Gentiles (Eph. 3:1-13).  Did this take place at Acts thirteen?  There can be but one answer to these questions.  They did not take place until the events recorded in Acts twenty-eight became history.  A dispensation is a "stewardship."  A stewardship implies a steward who receives a commission, and a dispensation "begins" when that steward receives the command "Go . . . tell this people" (Isa. 6:9), even as Paul waited until words of the Lord were recorded, "unto whom now I Send thee" (Acts 26:17).   (Charles H. Welch, Acts Thirteen or Acts Twenty-eight? or When did the present dispensation of the Mystery begin?, p. 1, 1957)

        Others who held dispensational positions similar to those of Mr. Welch included Otis Q. Sellers (1901 - 1992), founder of The Word of Truth Ministry in 1936, and the late Oscar M. Baker, (1898 - 1987), editor of Truth For Today which began publishing in 1948.  The ministry of the Berean Forward Movement continues today under the leadership of Mr. Stuart Allen.     

Post Acts 28:28 Positions

        Gordon K. Edgar claimed that the complete revelation of the truth of the present dispensation did not take place until well after Acts 28:28, and, consequently, that even the prison epistles are "transitional" in nature.  Commenting on Acts 28:28 Edgar states:

It may be asked whether the quotation of Isaiah 6:9, 10 in the latter portion of Acts 28, had any real significance at all.  The answer is, yes it did, but the importance of its appearance during the events at Rome must be neither minimized nor overemphasized.  (Gordon K. Edgar, Dispensationalism and Acts 28:28, Sept. 10, 1953, p. 26)

There can be no doubt that this was an important step away from the program of God to Israel.  It is as it were a climactic event in the history of the Acts, yet it was several years later before we have tangible evidence that God was absolutely through with Israel as a nation.  That evidence is presented historically in the destruction of both the Temple and the city of Jerusalem by Titus in 69-70 A.D.  (Op cit, p. 27)

Finally, we must take note of when the present economy of grace actually did begin if, as claimed in this study, it did not begin at any time during the book of Acts.  The answer is, that in conformity with the unique character of this administration, it had its beginning secretly and mystically, with no recorded action to mark the historicity of the event.  The transitional nature of many of Paul's final epistles gives adequate evidence as to the evolutionary nature of the administrational change.  Because of this, we must be especially alert to "test the things that differ" in those epistles of Paul written after the close of the book of Acts.  For some of these writings are transitional in nature and contain much material related to the systematic closing out of the kingdom program of the Acts era, as well as the unfolding and expansion of truths connected with this present administration.  (Op cit, p. 28)

        While there is overwhelming Biblical evidence to support the fact that "A church," (i.e., the future kingdom ekklesia that Christ promised to build (Mat. 16:18-19), began at Pentecost, the complete absence in Scripture of comparable evidence for the later birth or initiation of another ekklesia lead Mr. Edgar and others to propose what they felt was a plausible solution to the problem:  "that in conformity with the unique character of this administration, it had its beginning secretly and mystically, with no recorded action to mark the historicity of the event."  This theory, unfortunately, is known as reading the "wisdom of man" into the text of the inerrant Word of God.  Or, as another put it, "Reading the Word of God with pre-focused glasses."

Mervin A. Tillinghast

Mervin A. Tillinghast, (1909 - 1998), and the author of this paper were involved together in several gospel ministries.  We regularly gave gospel messages to inmates at a county jail, we gave out gospel tracts together, and we visited numerous people in need of eternal salvation.  "Merv" and I also engaged in numerous in-depth discussions regarding various features of truth found in the Scriptures.  We also published a limited circulation monthly Bible study known as "The Steward."   As to whether the birthday of the body of Christ and the beginning of the present dispensation occurred at the same historical time, this brother believed that "the body of the Lord Jesus Christ could not begin" until the truth of that one body was revealed.  Furthermore, he believed this truth is not revealed to every believer, therefore only a chosen few, while they may be "saved," are actually in the body of Christ.

I have been interested in looking at the Truth as it pertains to the Church, the Body of Christ.  I started out by using Eph 3:9, 10, 11 as my base "The purpose of the ages are purposed in Christ Jesus."  Therefore all truth centers in the Lord Jesus Christ.  Since all growth of the Body comes from the head Eph. 4:15, 16 and Col. 2:19 therefore there can be no Body of Christ until there has been the revelation of the Head. . . .  The Church is only made known to those who are chosen Eph. 1:3-5.  -  Merv Tillinghast, letter dated Aug 22, 1996

Brother Tillinghast believed, along with Gordon K. Edgar, that Ephesians and other prison epistles written during Paul's first imprisonment contained a number of elements of 'kingdom truth.'  In my opinion this theory puts Ephesians and other prison epistles outside the 'zip-code' mail zone specifically addressed to believers in the present dispensation.  That position leaves little or no Scriptures upon which to base God's message for believers following the default of the nation Israel at Acts 28:28.

Supportive arguments for and against the various positions

        Thus far we have cited four views as to when the present church began.  These are:

• Pentecost (Acts 2)

• Mid-Acts (Acts 9 or 13)

• Post-Acts 28:28

• During or after the second imprisonment of Paul

Most, although not all, who take one of the above positions also teach that the present dispensation began at the same time as they believe "the church" began.  (The present writer challenges that presupposition).

        There are, as should be noted, variations on the above four positions, but inasmuch as these are the most popular stands taken on this issue we will confine our discussion to them.  We will not be discussing "covenant of grace" views in this paper.

Acts 2 (Pentecost) position - Discussion

(This view holds that the present day "church" began at Pentecost, and that the present dispensation also began either at Pentecost or at the cross)

• Darby, Mackintosh and Chafer believed the present dispensation began at Pentecost, while Scofield held that it began at the cross.

• All four held that the "truth of the church" was first made known to Paul.

• None of these godly men appear to have fully appreciated the kingdom characteristics of the dispensation(s) that were in progress throughout the entire book of Acts.  Nor did they fully recognize the kingdom characteristics of the ekklesia ("church" or "gathering") that began at Acts 2.  (See Mat. 16:19 which clearly refers to that earthly kingdom character).

• Chafer speaks of "the doctrine of the Church" apparently assuming that the "revelation" given to the Apostle Paul in Ephesians and Colossians describes the operational principles, practices and doctrines of the church as it existed in Acts 2.  (In our opinion this violates a principle of exegesis, namely that one should not read the truth of one dispensation into another, earlier, administration).

• The authors cited above seemed not to grasp the significance of the dispensational changes that took place with the stoning of Stephen in Acts 7, an event that externally began God's purpose of hardening Israel's heart.  And, while some of these brethren recognized that Acts 28:28 clearly marked the temporary end of God's dealings with national Israel, they seemed not to carry through the implications of that truth.  In other words, if one recognizes that Acts 28:28 marks the end of the God's offer of the millennial kingdom to corporate Israel, then God's dispensational plan changed at that point.  And, therefore, Acts 28:28, not Pentecost (Acts 2), represents the beginning of the present dispensation.  Indeed, the index to Scriptures referred to in Chafer's Systematic Theology fails to include a single reference to Acts 28:28.  Interestingly, J. N. Darby did recognize Acts 28:28 as the time when national Israel was "shut up" from God's purpose but the full implications of that momentous event were not carried forward in his writings.

Such was the patience of God, that they [Israel] were not, historically, then shut up, till Paul's intercourse with them at Rome (Acts 28).  (Footnote to Notes on the Revelation, The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby, Vol. 2, p. 176 [1839])

• In addition, these very godly believers appear to have assigned a rigid ecclesiastical definition to the word "church" (ekklesia) even though the Greek word simply means a "gathering together" of people, usually, but not always, a "gathering" of God's people with no particular set of doctrines or practices attached to the meaning of that word "church."  But everyone who is familiar with the Hebrew prophets knows that they prophesied dozens of times that God would "gather" His people Israel in the last days to Himself; that Yahweh would put His Spirit upon (Isa. 44:3) and within (Ezek. 36:27) a believing Israel, and that He would be their God, and that they would be His people.  Is not this 'gathering' God's ekklesia ("gathering")?  Isn't this exactly what began to happen at the Jewish Feast of Weeks (Pentecost)?  Although the Hebrew Scriptures were written in Hebrew, and the word ekklesia ("gathering") is a Greek word, this certainly does not mean that the idea of an ekklesia ("gathering") is absent from the Old Testament.  In fact, the day of Pentecost was the actual beginning of the fulfillment of the Hebrew prophecies concerning the end times (Acts 2:26; 3:24).  Peter said:

     "But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
     "And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
     "And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy." (Acts 2:16-18)

• And that fulfillment of prophecy included the gathering of God's people from the ends of the earth unto Himself.

• Each of these four brethren cited earlier believed that God's "gathering" or "church" was the particular truth Paul described as a "mystery hidden throughout the ages in God" (Eph. 3:9; Col. 1:26).  Yet, if one carefully examines these passages, one finds that what was "hidden in God" was not "the Church," (I.e., not a 'gathering' of God's people), but the particular access unbelieving Jews and unbelieving Gentiles had to the gospel following the blinding of national Israel at Acts 28:28, and the spiritual relationship believing Jews and Gentiles had with one another.  Prior to Acts 28:28 the Jew had a covenant relationship with Yahweh, which meant they had a very special relationship with Him, a relationship which included the fact that they possessed the oracles of God, and that they possessed the promises of the Abrahamic covenant.  Gentiles, on the other hand, did not have this acceptableness.  However, at Acts 10:34, but not until then, Peter announces something completely new, that Gentiles are finally granted this "acceptableness" along with Jews.

"Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:  But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him." (Acts 10:34-35)

        This 'acceptance' with God does not mean Gentiles were "saved" by fearing God and working righteousness.  Nor did it mean Jews were "saved" by having a covenant relationship with God or by trying to keep the law.  It simply refers to the fact that covenant promises had been made to corporate Judaism, and that they had unique access to salvation, through faith as beautifully described by Paul in Romans.  Speaking of the means by which both Jews and Gentiles may receive eternal salvation Peter said:

"But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we [Jews] shall be saved, even as they." (Acts 15:11)

But following the blinding of National Israel at Acts 28:28, Jews no longer had this covenant 'advantage' spoken of in Romans 3:1-2.  And because Gentiles, from Acts 10 through 28, had been grafted into the new covenant blessings of Israel (Rom. 11:17, 24-25), the downfall of national Israel affected the Gentile's position of blessing as well as that of the Jew.  But Ephesians, written after the blinding of Israel at Acts 28:28, places individual Jews and Gentiles on the exact same level, namely as sinners who must come to God by faith.  No longer is the Jew "first" as in Romans 1:16 & 2:12.

   "Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
   "That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
   "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
   "For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
   "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
   "And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
   "And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
   "For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
   "Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
   "And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
   "In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
   "In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." (Eph. 2:11-22)

        Nowhere in Scripture is the ekklesia itself described as a "mystery."  Nor is the salvation of Gentiles a "mystery," as some have supposed.  Not only do the prophets tell of Yahweh's promise to "gather" His people Israel at the end of days, and to be their God, and they "His people."  (See Jer. 32:37-42; Ezek. 11:17-20; 36:24-28, etc.).  The prophets also tell of God's plan to bring Gentiles into spiritual blessing through the instrumentality of a saved national Israel. (See Isa. 42:6; 49:6; 56:3-7; 60:3; 66:23; Jer. 3:17; Zech. 14:16; John 4:22, etc.).  But this prophesied gathering of Gentiles is totally different from the One Body described by Paul in the above quotation from Ephesians.  There are several "mysteries" spoken of in the Gospels and in Paul's epistles, and we would do well to carefully consider, and distinguish between, each of them.

• Each of these three teachers seem to read Corinthian and Ephesian truth into Acts 2.  C.H.M. states regarding the event that took place on the day of Pentecost:

 "the Holy Ghost was sent down to baptize believers, whether Jews or Gentiles, into one body, and unite them to the risen and glorified Head in heaven"

But this could not be, because only Jews were present on that day of Pentecost.  There was no "one body" at that time.  The Scriptural truth of the unity of Gentiles in the spiritual body of Christ, was completely unknown in Scripture until Acts 10 at the very least, when God began the process of breaking off Israelite branches from their place of covenant blessing and grafting Gentiles into those spiritual new covenant blessings previously promised to national Israel.  Thus, while the ekklesia, the "gathering" of God's people Israel (and Gentiles) was no mystery, it was indeed a mystery that Gentiles would be united spiritually as one body with Jews in that "gathering," entirely apart from the rampant unbelief of official Judaism.  However, that feature of truth had not been revealed to the 'gathering' of God's people on the day of Pentecost.  And even Peter did not know it, at least until Acts 10, or possibly until it was later revealed to him by the apostle Paul.

Prophecy says God would bless Gentiles

        Let us contrast the position of the Hebrew prophets with that of the "one body" described by Paul.  The Hebrew Scriptures are clear that God would bless Gentiles.

     "And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations [Gentiles] shall flow unto it.
     "And many people [i.e., Gentiles] shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem." (Isa. 2:2-3)

But the prophecies also indicate that their outward status of Gentiles would be one of subservience to Israel.

     "And strangers [Gentiles] shall stand and feed your [Israel's] flocks, and the sons of the alien [Gentiles] shall be your ploughmen and your vinedressers.
     "But as for you [Israel], ye shall be called priests of Jehovah; it shall be said of you: Ministers of our God. Ye shall eat the wealth of the Gentiles, and into their glory shall ye enter." (Isa. 61:5-6)

Notice also the subservient position our Lord assigned to the Gentile woman who asked for His help:

     "And lo, a Canaanitish woman, coming out from those borders, cried to him saying, Have pity on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is miserably possessed by a demon.
     "But he did not answer her a word.  And his disciples came to him and asked him, saying, Dismiss her, for she cries after us.
     "But he answering said, I have not been sent save to the lost sheep of Israel's house.
     "But she came and did him homage, saying, Lord, help me.
     "But he answering said, It is not well to take the bread of the children and cast it to the dogs [Gentiles].
     "But she said, Yea, Lord; for even the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from the table of their masters.
     "Then Jesus answering said to her, O woman, thy faith is great. Be it to thee as thou desirest. And her daughter was healed from that hour.

Contrast this with Paul's teaching of the "one body":

     ". . .  we, being many, are one loaf, one body; for we all partake of that one loaf." (1 Cor. 10:17)

     "For even as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of the body, being many, are one body, so also is the Christ.
     "For also in the power of one Spirit we have all been baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bondmen or free, and have all been given to drink of one Spirit." (1 Cor. 12:12-13)

     "For He is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of enclosure,
     "having annulled the enmity in his flesh, the law of commandments in ordinances, that He might form the two in Himself into one new man, making peace;
     "and might reconcile both in one body to God by the cross, having by it slain the enmity." (Eph. 2:14)

It is absolutely necessary to distinguish between prophecy and mystery.  The Gentile's state of blessing in prophecy is quite different than the Gentile's status once the mystery of Israel's blindness was initiated through the ministry of Paul.  The same continues to be the case once we pass the dispensational dividing line of Acts 28:28.

Mid-Acts (Acts 9 and 13 viewpoints)

        Cornelius R. Stam, (1908- 2003), [referred to earlier], was a staunch supporter of the position that both the present dispensation, and the formation of the church which is Christ's body, began with the conversion of the apostle Paul (Acts 9).  Paul, according to Mr. Stam, was the first member of the church, the body of Christ.  We met brother Stam at the Grace Gospel Fellowship convention in 1962 and on other occasions.  Mr. Stam, like most 'Mid-Acts' and 'Acts 28:28' dispensationalists, did not distinguish between the concept of the formation of "the church" and the concept of the beginning of the present dispensation.  (We believe these are two very distinct features of truth that should not be combined).  He also equated "the present dispensation" with "the Body of Christ":

Much has been written on the question of the historical beginning of the dispensation of grace and of the body of Christ....  (Cornelius R. Stam, Acts--Dispensationally Considered, p. 167)

. . . it is serious error to hold that the new dispensation began at Pentecost with Peter and the eleven working under the "great commission."  (op cit, p. 168)

But the teaching that the present dispensation, or the Body of Christ, did not have its historical beginning until after the close of Acts is no less serious an error....  (op cit, p. 169)

As an example of the first "serious error" he says:

The most conspicuous modern product of this error has been the Pentecostal fanaticism which has swept the 'Christian' world on the wings of the Fundamentalist argument that we are to obey the 'great commission' and in response to its cry: "Back to Pentecost!"   (op cit, p. 168)

Interestingly, however, the very same kingdom miracles, signs, and wonders that took place at Pentecost, to which brother Stam refers, are the identical miraculous signs and wonders that were unmistakably prevalent in the one church that existed continuously from Acts 9 through Acts 28.  They also existed in that "church" which Paul called "Christ's Body" (1 Cor. 12:27).  These same signs and wonders are prominent in First Corinthians, one of Paul's epistles written during the book of Acts.   Thus, were it not for Stam's non-Biblical contention that two distinct churches simultaneously existed between Acts 9 and Acts 28, the same argument our brother levied against the Acts 2 position regarding "Pentecostal fanaticism" could conceivably be used against the Acts 9 and Acts 13 "mid-Acts" positions.  These signs did not slowly fade away as the written word became more and more complete.  They were in full force throughout the book of Acts, even as late as Acts 28:3-5, because God's offer of the earthly kingdom to corporate Israel remained in full force until Acts 28:28.  (See our article The Miracles, Signs and Wonders of the Great Commission where we show when and why these signs existed and when and why they disappeared).

        Stam reasoned that Acts 9, rather than Acts 13, was the time when the church which is Christ's body was formed, and when the present dispensation began.

Many able Bible teachers believe that the Body, or the new dispensation, had its historical beginning [in Acts 13].  Generally speaking, they hold this view on the grounds that here Paul was separated to begin his Gentile ministry, that the wording indicates the commencement of a new program and that Saul's name was changed to Paul in connection with an incident which all dispensationalists look upon as dispensationally significant.

In the light of the Scriptural background, however, we have not been convinced that these arguments are valid or, for the most part, even correct.

First, this passage does not say anything about the beginning of the Body or of a new dispensation any more than Acts 9 does.  In fact we have already pointed out no less than eight significant departures from the old dispensation prior to Acts 13.  (op cit, p. 173, 174) [bold face emphasis ours]

        Although Mr. Stam admitted that Acts 9  "does not say anything about the beginning of the Body or of a new dispensation" (page 173), he goes on to state five reasons why he believes "Paul's conversion and call to apostleship marks the beginning of the new dispensation and of the Body of Christ."  Our quotations are necessarily limited, so we encourage those interested in exploring these arguments to consult his writings.

• As the twelve apostles represented the twelve tribes of Israel so Paul, as one apostle, represents the Body of Christ, the oneness of which is consistently emphasized in Scripture (Rom. 12:5; 1 Cor. 12:13; Eph. 4:4; etc)

• Especially is this so since Paul, like the Body, was two-in-one.  He was a born Hebrew and a born Roman (and intensely both) in one person. . . .  Moreover he was an enemy, reconciled to God by abundant grace.  In this he is the natural representative of the joint Body, composed of Jews and Gentiles reconciled to God by grace.

• Several Scripture passages clearly imply, if they do not actually say, that the new dispensation began with Paul's conversion.  [See 1 Tim. 1:15,16; Rom. 3:24; 5:20; Eph. 1:7; etc.]

• In Acts 9 attention is focussed [sic.] entirely on Paul, first as 'breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord' and then as gloriously saved, commissioned and filled with the Spirit.  Nor is the emphasis on Paul in any way modified.  It is not 'Saul and Barnabas,' much less 'Barnabas and Saul,' but Saul.

• . . . the number of significant departures from the old program to the new that took place in the period covered by Acts 9 to Acts 13.  (op cit, pp. 176 - 179)

  1. The call of Paul as an apostle, separate from the twelve....

  2. Paul was not saved as a repentant Jew seeking baptism for the remission of sins.  He was baptized three days after his conversion. . . .  [just as the Gentiles in Acts 10] were baptized after being saved and receiving the Holy Spirit

  3. Gentiles were saved at Antioch, not because of Israel's conversion but because of the persecution at Jerusalem. . .

  4. "Kingdom prosperity" (Acts 4:34, 35) broke down and the Gentile believers at Antioch sent help.

  5. James was slain with the sword and the other James, the Lord's brother in the flesh, began to take the precedence even over Peter. (op cit, p. 179)

        As can be seen, although some of the above points are worthy of serious discussion, most of them have to do with the point in time he believed the present dispensation began, not with when the church began. In addition, we surmise many of his points appear to fall into the category of 'hopeful speculation.'  Unfortunately, he, along with many teachers with both 'Mid-Acts' and 'Acts 28:28' persuasions mingle arguments relating the historical beginning of the church with those pertaining to the beginning of the present dispensation.  Stam and many other dispensationalists see no difference between these two concepts.  Our position is that the presuppositions that force one to equate the beginnings of church & dispensation are not only unnecessary, but they are totally incorrect and lead to significant interpretive problems.  They assume something not stated in Scripture, namely, that when God, in His Sovereign wisdom, changes the way he deals with his people, He cancels out one spiritual relationship, [His church], and starts a new spiritual relationship, [a new church].  We do not find this argument to be supported by Scripture.  This mixing of two distinct features of truth is not "rightly dividing the word of truth." 

The Acts 28:28 viewpoint

        Citing the verse ". . . for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain" (Acts 28:20), Charles H. Welch said:

The hope of Israel reaches to the last chapter of Acts, yet according to traditional teaching the church began at Pentecost ! (Charles H. Welch, Dispensational Truth: or the Place of Israel and the Church in the Purpose of the Ages, p. 147)

[Acts 28:28] is a climax, and a climax having nothing to do with the church, but with Israel. ( op cit, p. 147)

        In this citation Mr. Welch clearly, but wrongly, identified the beginning of "the church" (Christ's gathering) with the particular Divine administrative theme for that "gathering" that was prevalent throughout the book of Acts.  He also assumed there could not be two consecutive dispensations without their being two distinct 'churches.'  He believed, (and we concur), the first 'church' began at Pentecost and had to do with Israel.  Then, following Acts 28:28 there was a new dispensation, (and we concur), and, necessarily, a completely new church, (and we do not concur).  But, actually, Welch has spelled out eight distinct churches that he believed must be distinguished from one another.

1. The nation of Israel viewed as distinct in their calling to be a kingdom of Priests in the earth (Acts 7:38).  In this light it will be perceived that some care must be exercised when we are seeking to differentiate between the Kingdom and the Church.

2. The Church spoken of as existing in the days of Christ's earthly ministry before either His sacrificial death, or before the day of Pentecost (Matt. 18:17).

3. The Church concerning which Christ spoke as future, and built upon the rock, and confession "Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God" relating to Peter with his keys of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 16:18).

4. The Church which was formed in the day of Pentecost, which
   1. partly fulfilled the prophecy of Joel 2:28,29.
   2. awaits complete fulfilment until the future day of the Lord
   3. is inseparable from the enduement of spiritual gifts.
   4. is inseparable from the kingdom of Israel (Acts 1:6, 2:30,31).
   5. is inseparable from baptism for the remission of sins.  This Church is related to the dispersion (Jas. 1:1,5:14).
5. The Church of God, which Paul persecuted before his conversion in Acts 9 (Gal. 1:13, 1 Cor. 15:9, Phil. 3:6) and which continued to assemble and to grow under his subsequent ministry (1 Cor. 1:2, 11:16, 1 Thess. 2:14, 2 Thess. 1:4).
6. The Church of God, called in the same chapter, the Church of the living God (1 Tim. 3:5,15) to whom was directed that ministry of re-adjustment which had in view the building up of the body of Christ until all arrived in the unity of the faith, etc. (Eph. 4:11-13).
7. The Church of the One Body, the calling that goes back before the foundation of the world, and ascends to the position "far above all" where Christ sits.  This church is entirely disassociated from all previous companies, having no relation with Israel, Abraham or New Covenant, but filling the great dispensational parenthesis of Israel's blindness, which fell on that nation in Acts twenty-eight.  The status, calling and constitution of this Church can be gathered by reading Ephesians and Colossians, remembering as the reading progresses, ever to “try the things that differ”.
8. The seven Churches of Asia (Rev. 1-3), one of them namely the Church at Pergamos, will be in the city "where Satan's seat is" (Rev. 2:13).  These seven churches will resume where the Church of Pentecost left off and carry the fulfilment of Joel 2:28,29 through to its end.  In these Churches there will be some who will "say they are Jews and are not" (Rev. 2:9).  This company, though enumerated separately, really falls under heading No. 4, but owing to the setting aside of Israel at the coming in of the dispensation of the Mystery, we have listed these Churches separately. -  (Charles H. Welch, An Alphabetical Analysis, part one, p. 162

        It is not clear whether Welch believed that the "church" which Saul of Tarsus persecuted prior to his conversion (item #5) was a different church from what was born at Pentecost (item #4).    He also seemed to distinguish somehow between "item #6" "the church of God" or "the church of the living God" (1 Tim. 3:5; 3:15), and "item #7" "The Church of the One Body".  In all fairness, I may not completely understand Mr. Welch's eight points in the above quote.  He may have been listing these churches with regard to what he falt were slight differences of Scriptural context.  However, in any case, I would have to say that his description boldly underscores my contention that it is a mistake to insist that a different church comes into being each time God, in His sovereign purposes, makes a dispensational change, whether major or minor, to His program.  We believe Welch's items #3 through #8 speak of a single church.  We also believe that within this one church significant dispensational differences occurred over a period of time.  But Welch offers no scriptural evidence that each church he cites had a beginning or an ending, particularly one that coincided with the beginnings and endings of various dispensational outpourings. 

        C. H. Mackintosh and L. S. Chafer, who held to the Acts 2 position, believed that the "church" was a mystery first revealed to the Apostle Paul, they, unfortunately, read Ephesian truth into Acts 2.  They forced the truth of the One Body, made up equally of Jewish and Gentile believers, into the makeup of the "church" at Pentecost, which was composed only of Jews.

        On the other hand Mr. Welch believed that the "Body of Christ" did not come into existence until after Acts 28:28, when the kingdom offer to Israel was set aside and the present dispensation began.  He argues that 1 Cor.12:15-26 is not the body of Christ.  His reasoning is:

[1 Cor. 12] verses 15--26 give a detailed and graphic analogy between the parts of a human body, and the various diversities, yet withal unity, of the saints. . . . It cannot be the 'one body' of Ephesians, for that had not been revealed, neither is there in that one body members who are 'the ear, the eye, or the nose," all of which belong to the head;  neither are some members of the body of Christ 'uncomely.'   (Charles H. Welch, Dispensational Truth, p. 162)

        Welch implies that the body of Christ could not exist until the full doctrinal truth of that body was set forth.  But, taking that assumption a step further, does that suggest that the Ephesian believers could not have been part of the dispensation of the mystery until the physical parchment describing this calling 'came in the mail' to them, perhaps several months after Acts 28:28?  The apostle Paul, for example, states that Abram was justified by faith without works (Rom. 4).  This establishes the fact that God has only one soteriology, only one plan of eternal salvation for believers of every dispensation.  Yet this feature of truth, though it existed from day-one, was not as clearly revealed in the Hebrew Scriptures  compared with the crystal clear manner in which it was revealed by Paul.  We suspect there were many things that saints possessed positionally, by God's sovereign grace, before they knew the doctrine concerning them.  Certainly that is the case with many of us today.  Therefore, to say that the 'one body' of Ephesians could not exist because the doctrinal truth of that body had not yet been fully revealed is not sound hermeneutics.  Furthermore, Welch attempts to explain away the passages in Paul's pre-prison epistles that, in this writer's mind, clearly speak of Christ's body the church.

        Regarding 1 Cor. 12:27, "Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular," Welch said:

The verse reads, "But ye are body of Christ, and members partially."  It is not the body; it is simply 'body,' the absence of the article showing us that a description (not a definition) is intended.  The word 'partially,' or 'in part,' is a translation of two Greek words, ek merous, and they occur together nowhere else except in 1 Cor. xiii.  (op cit, p. 162)

        Regarding his translation of ek merous, as "partially," as though the believers at Corinth may have been "partially" members of "body of Christ," but not fully members, unlike the glorious position enjoyed by the Ephesian believers, we took the trouble of going through a collection of Bible translations to see if any resembled his interpretation.  Caution!  A number of these translations are definitely not on our "recommended" list, but I list their rendering nonetheless.

Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. KJV
Now *ye* are Christ's body, and members in particular. Darby
Now ||ye|| are the body of Christ, and members severally;  Rotherham
Now ye are the body of Christ, and severally members thereof. (marg. Or, members each in his part) RV
Now ye are the body of Christ, and severally members thereof. ASV
Now you are Christ's Body, and severally members of it.  Moffatt
Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually.  New KJV
And ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. Youngs
As for you, you are the body of Christ, and individually you are members of it. Weymouth
Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.  Websters
Now you are Christ's body and individual parts of it.  ISV
So you are Christ's body, and individually parts of it.  William's
Now you are the body of Christ, and individually members of it.  Montgomery
and you are a body for Christ, and participating members.  Ferrar Fenton
Now you are Christ's body, and each of you a limb or organ of it.  New English Bible
But you are Christ's body and members with assigned parts.  Berkeley
Now you are Christ's body, and individually members of it.  New American Standard Bible
Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.  RSV
Now YOU are Christ's body, and members individually  New World Translation
And you are the body of Christ, and members in part.  Modern King James
Now you are the body of Christ, and members of a part.  Concordant Version

W. E. Vine says the following about the phrase ek merous:

In 1 Cor. 12:27, R.V., the phrase ek merous, lit., out of a part (meros), is rendered "severally"  (W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words)

        The Companion Bible has notes on the words "the body" and on the words "in particular":

the body.  There is no art. because soma is the predicate.  Cp. [1 Cor.] 3:16 [temple of God]

in particular.  Gr. ek merous.  The meaning is "Each in his part", as R.V. m.

        Regarding the absence of the definite article before the word "body," although its absence sometimes lends a 'characteristic' sense, it should not be translated "a body of Christ."  One false religion denies the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ because in John 1:1 the Greek definite article does not appear before the word theos.  They mistransle the verse "and the Word was a god" (sic.).  But, as several translations above indicate, the verse in 1 Corinthians 12:27 can be correctly translated either:

"Now you are [the] body of Christ"   

or

"Now you are Christ's body"

        The reader can decide for himself whether Mr. Welch's rendering of ek merous as "members partially" is the proper rendering, or whether the 21 renderings presented above, and the rendering of Dr. Bullinger's Companion Bible are closer to the intended meaning.  We feel the meaning is plain.  Paul was telling the Corinthian believers "Now ye are Christ's body, and individually members of it."  In other words, the "body of Christ" was in full existence when Paul wrote his early epistles, even though the full truth of that doctrine had not yet been fully unfolded.  And, just as the Corinthian believers were "Christ's body" the believers in Ephesus were "His body" (Eph. 5:30).  Both passages mean exactly the same thing.

        It is this writer's opinion that there is no need to "force" the plain meaning of Scripture into a "system" of interpretation.  There are many things we do not know this side of the heavenlies, but we should be "Bereans" who are open to hearing and believing the Scriptures.

Second Pauline imprisonment theory

        As mentioned earlier, some dispensationalists felt there were smatterings of "kingdom truth" in some of Paul's prison epistles (Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Timothy).  For this reason a small number of dispensationalists take the position that the present dispensation began with, or even after, the second imprisonment of Paul.  They also say the church which is Christ's body did not have its beginning until that time, thus leaving Second Timothy as the most, and only, current revelation of truth for today.  As to the exact point of the beginning of the present day church several of their teachers hold that 'consistent with the secret nature of the present dispensation, the exact point at which the church began is also secret.'  I find this reasoning to be completely unsatisfying from a Biblical standpoint because it totally smacks of human invention.  Also, since the truths of the mystery and of the [new] one body are not developed in Second Timothy, the 'second imprisonment dispensationalists' are left with little to base any dispensational teaching upon.

        One of their 'concerns' is, for example, that Ephesians 6 makes an earthly promise of long life to those who honor parents.

     "Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honor thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth." (Eph. 6:1-3)

The epistle to the Ephesians also likens the husband-wife relationship to that which exists between Christ and the church, thus indicating that the church is portrayed as a bride, or wife, of Christ.  This concept is felt by some to be uncomfortably close to the kingdom term "bride of Christ" as presented in the Gospels and the Revelation.  However, the late pastor John D. LaVier (1906 - 2005), a "Mid-Acts" dispensationalist, freely volunteered during a personal conversation with me in his home in Indianapolis, Indiana in January 1959, that Ephesians 5 speaks of the present-day church as a 'bride.'  Such an idea, however, may not set well with many Mid-Acts and Acts 28:28 brethren who teach that the church is a "body," but never a "bride."  They find it difficult to conceive that it may be both, forgetting that these are symbolic representations, and it sometimes takes two or more 'symbols' to bring out the full truth.  We quote the full passage for your convenience.

     "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.  For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body.
     "Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
     "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,  that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
     "So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies.  He that loveth his wife loveth himself.  For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:  For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
     "For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
     "This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
     "Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband." (Eph. 5:22-33)

        The truth of the marriage relationship is a fundamental horizontal truth dating to Adam (See Mat. 19:3-9), and it governs all mankind during our existence on earth in every age.  It is not confined only to God's dealings with Israel per se.  Many of the foundation truths of the faith, and even of the mystery itself, are not mentioned in Second Timothy.  But the fact that Paul does not repeat these foundational features of truth in Second Timothy does not indicate these foundations are invalid in the present dispensation.  One 'post-Acts 28 plus-plus' dispensationalist confided to me that he was not even sure that the apostle Paul himself had fully come to understand the distinctiveness of the mystery, because of hints here and there of non-heavenly elements that appear even in his later writings.  Hmmm! 

The position of ThyTestimonies

        At this point it is appropriate that we insert our own position as to when the church began, and also our understanding as to when the present dispensation began.  We believe these two concepts are entirely distinct.  Being part of Christ's universal church is a privilege enjoyed by every person who has a personal spiritual link to the Savior.  This 'membership' has nothing to do with 'belonging' to some local church, chapel, or man-made religious organization on earth.  Thus, Christ's church (i.e., His 'gathering') began when the first repentant believer was baptized by the Lord Jesus Christ with the Holy Spirit into that church. We propose to show that this event occurred when God was literally offering the earthly kingdom to Israel within the framework of the prophesied new covenant.

        From Pentecost to the present time, God has administered to His company of believers making up Christ's "gathering" three differing spiritual and physical programs, or dispensations.

Dispensation #1:  When God first began to 'gather' His ekklesia  on the Jewish Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), God offered to 'restore' the literal, physical, prophesied millennial kingdom to Israel through the resurrected Messiah (Acts 3:19-21).  Those who believed this message became a remnant of believing Israelites (Isa. 10:21) known as the ekklesia (church, assembly, gathering).  The Hebrew prophets foretold that God would pour out His Spirit upon His 'gathering' (Isa. 44:3; Ezek. 39:29; Joel 2:28) and put His Spirit within them (Ezek. 37:14; 11:19; 36:27), just as happened on the day of Pentecost.  For the time being, those who rejected His offer continued to be God's covenant people, having access to the promises of God, but without actually partaking of the good of those promises.  During this dispensation that began at Pentecost absolutely no Gentiles participated in the blessings offered by the twelve apostles.  It was not yet their time, because corporate Israel, (the missionaries who possessed God's law), had not yet believed in their Anointed One.

Dispensation #2:  Approximately ten long years after Pentecost God opened access to Gentile salvation, albeit under the umbrella of God's covenant relationship with Israel.  (Gentiles were grafted into the olive tree, which represented the covenant blessing of God which belonged uniquely to Israel - see Romans 11).  At this time the Jew was "first" because of their covenant relationship with God.

Dispensation #3:  Eventually, at Acts 28:28, when Israel's rejection of God's Son became final and complete, God temporarily abolished His covenant relationship with Israel, and opened the door of blessing to all people, both Jews and Gentiles,  without regard to nationality or any former covenant position.  Gentile blessing was no longer tied in any way with corporate Judaism.

        But, although God dispensed His blessings in three distinct ways, are we to understand that He must have created three distinct 'churches' during the historical period covered by the Acts?  We see no evidence that additional 'churches' were initiated as God's dispensational program progressed.  When God first began to 'close out' his dealings with His covenant people Israel did He create a series of 'new' churches each time He introduced new relationships with those Jews and Gentiles whom He had 'gathered' unto Himself in Christ Jesus?  There is no scriptural evidence that multiple 'churches' existed simultaneously, or even serially, as His purposes progressed.  While we recognize the fact that there were sharp changes in God's programs during the historical period covered by the book of Acts,  we find no place where Scripture indicates He created any new 'gathering' subsequent to the 'assembly' He had created on that special day of Pentecost.

        While we firmly believe the present dispensation began at or soon after Acts 28:28, we believe the church that began at Pentecost continues unending to this present day.  Significant non-biblical, and even un-biblical, conclusions are forced upon us if we assume that a new church had to be born whenever a new dispensation, or sub-dispensation, is perceived to have begun subsequent to Acts 2.  This is true whether it is believed a new dispensation, or sub-dispensation, began at Acts 9, Acts 13, Acts 28:28, or during the second imprisonment of Paul.  Here is a brief amplification of our position:

• The formation of God's church began at Pentecost.  The Lord Jesus prophesied in Matthew 16:18-19 that He would soon build a church, a church closely connected to the prophesied kingdom.  This church was born when the Holy Spirit was poured out upon the disciples in fulfillment of John the Baptist's prophecy.  But although the Pentecostal kingdom dispensation was initiated at the very same time God's ekklesia was born, a dispensation is a concept entirely distinct from the idea of "forming a church."  The unique characteristics of that kingdom dispensation became obvious when Peter preached to the Jews, offering them the physical return of the Lord Jesus Christ, and 'times of refreshing,' conditional on Israel's repentance and ceremonial purification (baptism) with water.  This dispensation began at Pentecost and continued until the stoning of Stephen.  During that dispensation only Jews (no Gentiles) were in the ekklesia, and certainly there existed no "Body" of Jews and Gentiles on an equal footing.

• The next dispensation, (or if you prefer 'sub-dispensation,') began after the Jerusalem Israelites decisively rejected their Messiah by stoning God's prophet Stephen.  This stoning was reckoned by God as being the same as if the Jews had stoned the Lord Himself (see Mat. 25:40), except that now they were also rejecting the works of the Holy Spirit (see Matthew 12:31).  These works of the Spirit were obvious in the miracles and signs presented as Divine evidences to the Jews.  These miraculous signs were the "powers of the age to come", that coming age being the millennium (see Heb. 2:3-4 & 6:5).  Because of their unbelief, God at that time began (note the change in God's administration) an outward, ongoing, process of hardening Israel's heart.  Note that Stephen saw the Lord Jesus "standing," not "seated" (see Isa. 3:13 & James 5:9).  This was a warning that the Lord Jesus was about to pour out terrible judgment upon His people Israel.  Up until this point in the book of Acts the gospel had been preached to Jews only, because, according to prophecy, Jews were to be God's missionaries to enlighten the Gentiles (Isa. 2:2-3; 42:6; 49:6; 60:1-3).  The Lord Himself told the Samaritan woman, "...salvation is of the Jews" (John 4:22).  In order for Yahweh to use Israel as His missionaries, Israel must first believe the word of God and accept their Messiah.  But in Acts 7, rather than bow to their Messiah, the Israelites at Jerusalem demonstrated their unbelief, thus disqualifying themselves from fulfilling their prophesied missionary roll. Just as Prince Edward VIII abdicated his kingship so that he might marry a woman unsuitable to royalty, so the Jewish leaders at Jerusalem, blinded by their unbelief, abdicated their covenant position, in effect selling their birthright for a mess of pottage.

In response to their unbelief, God began the process of hardening corporate Israel's heart (Rom. 8:18), and of provoking them to jealousy (Rom. 10:19; 11:11; see also Acts 17:5), while mercifully saving individual Jews (Rom. 11:1, 2, 5, 14; 1 Cor. 9:22).  This sub-dispensation, in which God began the process of terminating His prophesied covenant relationship with Israel, spanned the twenty or so years from Acts 8 through Acts 28:28.

In order to provoke His people Israel to jealousy God sovereignly called Gentiles to partake of His mercies (Rom. 11:11).  This inclusion of Gentiles took place not through the preaching of a believing Israel, but in spite of the fact they refused to believe.  Thus, the manner in which Gentiles were included in God's program was completely different from the way the prophets had spelled it out.  It was one of the pieces of God's program that was not revealed to the prophets.  It was a 'mystery' (Rom. 11:25; 16:25).  Peter, the apostle with the keys of God's government, or kingdom, was used by the Holy Spirit to open the door of salvation to Cornelius, a Gentile (Acts 10 & 11).  God then raised up His "chosen vessel," Saul of Tarsus, to be the specific "apostle of the Gentiles" (Rom. 11:13).

Yet, during this 'sub-dispensation,' in spite of the fact that Paul was the apostle of the Gentiles, whenever he entered a new city on one of his missionary journeys, he always preached the word to the Jew first.  Paul said preaching to the Jews first was "necessary" (Acts 13:46).  Christians in some modern Messianic movements wrongly believe the Jew is still first!  Not so!  That faulty belief hangs on a failure to "rightly divide" the Word of truth.  The requirement that the Jew must be first was terminated when the final outpost of the Jewish dispersion (Rome) officially rejected their Messiah, resulting in the offer of God's salvation being immediately taken from them and given to the Gentiles (Acts 28:28).

But what about the church?  Did a new church begin with this new dispensation in which Gentiles have a part?  Did a new church begin at Acts 9, or at Acts 13, or at Acts 28:28?  If so this fact is not revealed in Scripture.  Following the martyrdom of Stephen God began to blind Israel (Rom. 11:25), but this outrage by unbelieving Jewish religionists had no effect on the spiritual position of the 'remnant of Israel,' (those individual, faithful, believing Jews who had formed His "assembly" or "gathering" beginning with the day of Pentecost).  Therefore, we hold that although God began to irreversibly change His program at Acts 8, He did not create a new church to accommodate this changed administration.  Nor did he discard the church that had its inception on the day of Pentecost (even though the characteristics of that "gathering of believers" underwent a remarkable change).

• The present dispensation began following Acts 28:28.  When we come to the final chapter of the Acts, the gospel had been sent to the Jews at Jerusalem and to the dispersed Israelites throughout much of the world, but had not reached the Jews of the dispersion at Rome.  Wherever the gospel had previously been preached it had been rejected by the Jewish leaders, and, hence, by national Israel itself.  Moreover, the signs and wonders of the Holy Spirit had also been rejected by them (see Mat. 12:31).  Finally, at Rome, Paul preached his last appeal to the Nation that had killed the prophets, and had even executed their blessed Holy Messiah. At this low point in Israel's history, the Jews of the dispersion at Rome joined their unbelieving brethren in Jerusalem and throughout the world by likewise rejecting the risen Lord Jesus Christ, and by rejecting the miracles and signs of the Holy Spirit, the very signs of the millennium to come (Heb. 2:5; 6:5).  With finality Paul then quoted the judgment presented in the prophet Isaiah that sealed Israel's blindness, deafness, and hardness of heart.  This rejection of their Anointed One ended Israel's opportunity to fulfill God's prophetic program at that time.  With this final rejection, we believe the signs and wonders ceased, having no further purpose in provoking Israel to a jealousy that, could once have led them to salvation.  Even the Gentiles would no longer possess those signs, because Gentiles had received them specifically as signs as part of God's covenant purpose toward unbelieving Israel (1 Cor. 14:22).  The purpose of these signs of the millennial age to come were not, as some suppose, to verify God's message until the canon of Scripture would be finished (e.g., in AD 98).

Following Acts 28:28, additional features of the 'mystery' were revealed in all its fullness.  The Jew was no longer first.  Their preferential covenant position had been placed in abeyance.  Corporate Israel was reckoned now as being no different from any of the other nations.  An unbelieving Gentile and an unbelieving Jew now have the same doctrinal and governmental standing before God.  They are both sinners in need of salvation.  The Jew was now considered "Lo ammi", ("not My people" - see Hosea 1:9).  The gospel is now presented to Jew and Gentile on an equal basis.  The Jew no longer had advantages not enjoyed by Gentiles. (After they believe, of course, the spiritual position of all of God's saints, whether Jew, Gentile, male or female, is described as "one in Christ Jesus.")

     "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
     "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
     "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:26-28)

        What about the church?  Did a new church begin at Israel's final rejection of Christ, after which Paul for the first time in history unveiled the full impact of the blessed heavenly doctrines that had been kept secret from before the foundation of the world?  Not at all.  On the contrary, in Ephesians 1:13 Paul provides a link between the Ephesian believers and the baptism of the Holy Spirit that took place in Acts 2.  He identifies these believers with that momentous event at Pentecost when the Lord Jesus first "poured out" the Holy Spirit, thus making the Ephesian believers a part of that truth.  Ephesians 1:13 says, "ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise."  The word "promise" refers to the promise made by John the Baptist (Mat. 3:11-12; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16), and by the Lord Jesus (Acts 1:5).  Paul could have simply said 'ye were sealed with the holy Spirit,' in which case the vital connection with Pentecost would have been lost.

        In Ephesians 2:19-22 Paul reintroduces the concept of the holy temple, a doctrine he had subjectively, but only partially, developed in the pre-prison epistles (1 Cor. 3:16, 17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16).  In Ephesians 2 Paul more fully develops the doctrine, and specifically mentions that this holy temple, of which the Ephesian saints were part of, was "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone."  These Ephesians were not part of the millennial kingdom preached at Pentecost, but they were indeed part of the gathering which Christ the Rock began to build at Pentecost.  While it is true there were apostles other than Paul and the twelve, the term "the apostles" usually refers to the classification known as the twelve apostles who lived following Acts 1:26.  Thus, Paul is careful to connect the believers at Ephesus with those believers who witnessed the initial going forth of God's message on the Jewish day of Pentecost and the pouring out of the promised Holy Spirit.

        There are three references in Paul's writings where he laments the fact that he had persecuted "the church."  Two of these references occur in his pre-prison epistles (written before Acts 28:28), and one in a prison epistle (written after Acts 28:28):

"For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted THE church of God." (1 Cor. 15:9)

"For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted THE church of God, and wasted it." (Gal. 1:13)

"Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting THE church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless." (Phil. 3:5-6)

        Which "church" (ekklesia) did Saul persecute?  Clearly the "church" that began at Pentecost.  Mid-Acts dispensationalists generally hold that "the historical manifestation of the Body of Christ began with the Apostle Paul before he wrote his first epistle."  But Saul had not yet been converted at the time he persecuted "THE church," so, according to the Mid-Acts logic, the particular church he persecuted must certainly have been the church that began at Pentecost.

        However, in Philippians, one of the post-Acts 28:28 prison epistles, Paul states that before his conversion he had been "persecuting THE church."  Paul did not simply persecute "a church," but "THE church," the Greek definite article being present in all three citations above.  The Divine mover of Paul's pen could have simply stated that Paul had persecuted "the believers," or "the saints," or "the brethren," but He did not.  He had persecuted "THE church."  Paul does not distinguish between a supposed 'old' church that began at Pentecost, and a 'new' church that existed in 'prison epistle' days.  In the absence of any disclaimers in this passage of Scripture, Paul was clearly implying that the church, the body of Christ with which Paul and the Philippians were identified was the same church Paul had once persecuted. 

        When a controversy arose as to whether believing Gentiles must be circumcised, (i.e., become Jews), before they could be saved (Acts 15:1), Paul did not announce that the kingdom church composed of Jerusalem Jews could do their 'Jewish' thing, whereas the "body of Christ" (the supposed 'other' church to which Paul belonged) would do the opposite.  Since there was only one church, (which included the Jerusalem Jews, the Jews of the dispersion, and the Gentiles), and because the offer to the Jewish nation of God's new covenant and millennial kingdom was still on the table, Paul took his case to the apostles and elders at Jerusalem.  These twelve apostles had been specifically given authority to make such decisions as directed by the Holy Spirit (Mat. 16:19; John 20:22-23).  It was the apostles at Jerusalem, not the apostle Paul, who made the final pronouncement that Gentiles did not have to be circumcised.  When Peter, James and other Jews in Jerusalem reached this decision,  "the apostles and elders, with the whole church" at Jerusalem sent a company of Jews from their assembly to the Gentile believers to convey that decision, thus strongly reinforcing the unity of all believers, and the authority of the eleven remaining apostles, whether they were in a local congregation at Jerusalem or in the far off lands of the Gentiles.  There was only one church, not two.

        In addition, Paul's teaching about "the body of Christ" is a truth revealed to him about the relationship of believers to one another and to Christ their Head.  When God reveals something new it by no means says he is terminating one 'church' and starting another.  It simply means that He is bringing those who have a spiritual link with His Son into a further advancement of the truth.  Each time Paul wrote letters to various groups of Christians he revealed numerous features of truth that had not previously been known.  That does not mean that with each teaching in an epistle a new ekklesia was born and anything previous must pass away.  All of our dispensational positions must be based on the Scriptures, not on "I think such and such...."  In other words, be a Berean!

        Therefore, based on Scriptural evidence, instead of a new church being initiated at Acts 9, or at Acts 13, or after Acts 28:28, the character and message of the church which had existed since Pentecost simply changed with whatever dispensational theme God, in His absolute sovereignty, had brought to the called saints.  Once God shut up corporate Israel in unbelief, those who did become believers, (this "church"), no longer offered the kingdom to Israel, no longer were part of Israel's new covenant, no longer had miraculous powers, no longer spoke in tongues, but they now had the very highest blessings to be revealed, blessings in the heavenlies in Christ (Eph. 1:3; Col. 3:1-3).  Yet Scripture indicates that these new heavenly blessings were given to individuals who comprised the same "church" that had existed since Pentecost.

        Although our understanding is that Scripture teaches that the present dispensation began after Acts 28:28 we do not necessarily agree with all of the conclusions of some who hold that both the present dispensation and the church, the body of Christ began following Acts 28:28.  For example, we must ask which practices of the early church are 'truth for today,' and which belonged strictly to the early church that preached the 'restoration' of the earthly kingdom to Israel.  Indeed, the fact that the prison epistles stress the unity of the church from Pentecost to the present time requires us to resolve these questions in a more moderate way, as 'Bereans,' rather than by adopting inflexible formulae to either include or to exclude certain early practices.

        We see evidences that a new church, separate from the 'church in the wilderness,' began on the day of Pentecost, in accordance with the promise the Lord Jesus Christ made in Matthew 16:18.  On that day of the Jewish Feast of Weeks, (Pentecost), Christ baptized believers with the Holy Spirit, gathering them into a company known as the ekklesia. Various and differing blessings would be dispensed to that ekklesia depending on the spiritual position of national Israel at any particular time.  This promised 'church' or 'gathering' of God's elect continued to exist throughout the various changes in God's programs during the book of Acts, and this same 'church' continues to exist today. 

        This 'church' has thus far seen three dispensations.

1. God offers the earthly kingdom to Israel in preparation for their 'great commission' ministry to all nations.  This offer of the kingdom was part of the 'new covenant' promises made to Israel and Judah, and was accompanied by the miracles and signs of the Holy Spirit which verified to Israel the authenticity of God's message.  In that dispensation, Israel was to be God's vehicle to bring salvation to all the nations (Gentiles) in accordance with prophecy.   This dispensation began at Acts 2, and while God's offer of the kingdom to Israel continued until Acts 28:28, the stoning of Stephen in Acts 7 marked the time the official leaders of the Jerusalem Jews officially rejected God's Anointed Son.  Stephen was a prophet 'filled with the Holy Spirit.'  When the Jewish leaders at Jerusalem killed Stephen, they were both crucifying afresh the Son of God and were rejecting the witness of the Holy Spirit (see Heb. 6:6).  This demonstration of Israel's unbelief prompted the unfolding of the second dispensation in the book of Acts.

2. God provokes Israel to jealousy because of their stubborn rejection of the witness of the Holy Spirit.  To provoke Israel to jealousy, God gave to Gentiles the miracles and signs which belonged to Israel.  He broke off some natural, (Israelite), branches from the olive tree (Rom. 11:17).  The olive tree represented the Jew's covenant position of blessing.  By grafting Gentiles into the Jew's exclusive position of blessing it created unmitigated jealousy on the part of the unbelieving Jews.  (See Acts 22:21-22 where the Jews listened to Paul until he mentioned the word "Gentiles."  In other words, Gentiles partook of the blessings Israel should have had.  In this way God bypassed His prophetic promises that Gentile blessing would take place through a faithful Israel, blessing them instead in spite of unfaithful Israel.  This period is referred to by Paul as the mystery of Israel's blindness (Rom. 11:25).

During dispensation #2, Paul systematically went to the responsible leaders of the Jews of the dispersion in every city, offering the gospel to them (Acts 19:10).  Each time they rejected it Paul went to the Gentiles, much to the consternation of the Jews.  Finally, when his message had been rejected by the Jews throughout the world, he presented the truth of the Messiah to the large gathering of Jews at Rome.  This gathering of the Jewish clergy represented the final outpost of the Jews of the dispersion.  When these officials of the Jewish dispersion joined the officials of the Jews at Jerusalem by rejecting the Lord of Glory, Paul quoted the curses of the prophecy of Isaiah, and thus imposed Divine judgment upon Israel in accordance with the authority granted him as an apostle to bind in heaven what had taken place on earth (see Mat. 16:19; 18:18; John 20:23).

     "And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers,
     "Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive:
     "For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
     "Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it."  (Acts 28:25-28)

3. The heavenly blessing of believers.  Following this pronouncement of Divine judgment, Israel temporarily ceased to be God's prophetic instrument for the salvation of the Gentile world.  With Israel out of the picture there was no longer need for the Jewish miracles and signs, confirmations of the earthly kingdom and its heaven-sent messengers.  Paul introduced wonderful new features of truth for members of God's church, the body of Christ.  These truths were collectively known as the 'mystery,' because they had been hidden in God throughout the Old and New Testament record, until revealed specifically to Paul the apostle.  They were hidden in God, not hidden somewhere in the Hebrew Scriptures, and were not to be found by 'reading between the lines.'

This "mystery" goes further than the "mystery" stated in Romans, (which was the blessing of Gentiles apart from the prophesied roll Israel should have had).  Yes, the "mystery" of Romans continued beyond Acts 28:28, but its purpose was no longer to create jealousy in the hearts of the nation Israel.  Some of the Scriptural points contained in the "mystery" in Ephesians and Colossians are as follows:

• It specifically identified the position outside of Christ occupied by both Jewish and Gentile unbelievers

• It outlined their now equal-access to the blessing of eternal salvation

• It stated the spiritual position in Christ enjoyed by believing Jews and Gentile alike.

• Their expectation of blessing was no longer that of the return of Christ to set up His kingdom on earth.

• Their blessing was now "Every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ" (Eph. 1:3), not a position of rule over a small section of earth (see Mat. 19:28)

• Seated together with Christ in the heavenlies (2:6)

• An "election" in Christ which took place before the foundation of the world (vs 4).  This contrasts with the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven that had been kept secret from the foundation of the world (Mat. 13:35).

• Being "marked out beforehand for adoption" (or sonship) (vs 5)

• Being taken unto favor in the Beloved (vs 6)

• Knowledge of the mystery of His will, having to do with the administration of the fulness of times, when all things will be head up in Christ (vs 9)

• The redeemed believers are now Christ's own inheritance (Eph. 1:18)

• Individuals from the nations (Gentiles) would be joint heirs, a joint body, and joint partakers of His promise in Christ Jesus (3:6).  This is in contrast to the inferior governmental position of Gentiles as predicted in prophecy.

        We believe there is overwhelming evidence that Christ's church began on the day of Pentecost.

• His church was still future while the Lord Jesus was on earth (Mat. 16:18)

• It had already been born as of Acts 2:47 and 5:11

• Since the church is redeemed by His blood (Eph. 5:25-27) it could not have existed until Christ died

• It could not exist until the coming of the Spirit, because it is with (Gk. en) the Spirit that we are baptized into one body (1 Cor. 12:13).  That baptism was forecast by John the Baptist (Mat. 3:11), and by the Lord Jesus (Acts 1:5; 11:16).  Both John the Baptist and Paul indicate that the Lord Jesus is the baptizer, and that He baptized with (Gk en) [the] Spirit.

• The above facts incontrovertibly point to Pentecost as the birthday of the church the Lord predicted by the Lord in Matthew 16:18

But is this 'church' which had its historical beginning at Pentecost the same church as exists today?

• There is no historical evidence in the book of Acts, on a par with the evidence presented above, that there was any church 'beginning' other than the one that began at Pentecost.  Any 'evidence' to the contrary appears to be 'interpretive' in nature, and requires a great deal of human reasoning skills to arrive at such conclusions.  An illustration of this is that even in the mid-Acts camp, there is disagreement as to whether this new 'church' began at Acts 9 with the conversion of Saul, or at Acts 13 with the commending of Paul and Barnabas to the work of the Lord.  Each camp has its differing proof texts, but only a watered down doctrinal statement avoids the controversy and unites the Acts 9 and the Acts 13 brethren.  Again, the proof-texts presented by mid-Acts adherents completely fail to attain a satisfactory Scriptural level, and are by no means comparable to the incontrovertible historical beginning of Christ's "gathering" cited in Acts 2.  The birthday of the church at Pentecost requires no pre-focused glasses in order to plainly see it.  At one moment the church did not exist, but then, suddenly at Acts 2 it is there, and cannot be missed.  The same can not be said of other church 'birthdays.'

• During the book of Acts the apostle Paul refers to the 'ekklesia' (church) numerous times.  Nowhere does he use terms such as the 'old' church, or anything comparable, to distinguish the 'ekklesia' which began at Pentecost from that 'ekklesia' which was in existence when he wrote his pre-prison or even his prison epistles.  He always appears to have thought of the church as a single entity. 

• The church Saul of Tarsus persecuted was the church at Jerusalem (Acts 8:1, 3).  Dispensationalists generally agree that the Jerusalem kingdom church began at Pentecost.  In persecuting the church, the Lord Jesus tells Saul he was persecuting Christ Himself (Acts 9:4-5).  This suggests the church at that time had a spiritual link with the Lord not unlike the link later revealed as existing between Christ the Head of the church and the members of the body of Christ.

• Paul laments his roll in persecuting "the church of God" (1 Cor. 15:9; Gal. 1:13), and "the church" (Phil. 3:6).  In all three passage the Greek definite article occurs.  Paul does not simply say he persecuted 'believers,' or 'the saints,' which could apply to any church of whatever origin, but specifically to the church.  Nowhere does he suggest that he persecuted the 'old' church, in contrast to what existed in First Corinthians and Galatians.  Nor does he, in the prison epistle Philippians, suggest that the Acts 2 church he persecuted was in any way a different 'church' from the ekklesia of which the Philippians were members.

• When a controversy arose as to whether Gentiles must be circumcised, Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles, presented the matter to the church at Jerusalem, and allowed them to settle the matter, without further comment from him.  Thus, he bowed to the remaining eleven apostles, those with Divine authority at Jerusalem.  If Paul was the first member of a 'new' church known as the body of Christ why would he submit to the authority of apostles in the 'old' kingdom church?

• Likewise, if Paul was the first member of the church known as the "body of Christ" does it not seem strange that Ananias, a member of the 'old' kingdom church that began at Pentecost, baptized Paul who was not even in the same church as Ananias, but was, supposedly, a member of a new and different church?

• Since mid-Acts dispensationalists commonly hold water baptism to be a 'kingdom' ceremony, and not an ordinance applicable to the "body of Christ", the question arises, why was Paul baptized with water in the first place?  And why did he later baptize others who, presumably, were members of the body of Christ?  We believe such questions are satisfactorily answered by separating the two distinct concepts (the beginning of the church, and the initiation of the present dispensation).  And it is important to keep in mind that the Lord spoke directly to Ananias.  Ananias healed Paul, and revealed his future ministry to him in detail

     "And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.
     "For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.
     "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

• We find it difficult to believe that with God controlling the words and actions of Ananias in this manner, it was Jewish kingdom prejudices rather than the direct word of God that commanded Saul to be baptized.

• In Ephesians, a 'prison epistle,' Paul describes the structure of a Holy Temple that consists of those who were once strangers and foreigners (Eph. 2:19-22).  The foundation of that Temple consisted of "the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone."  Thus, although the great dispensational boundary line occurred at Acts 28:28, Paul establishes this link between the present status of the Ephesian believers and the members of that church which had come into existence on the day of Pentecost.  While there were apostles other than the twelve, Paul being one of them, we understand this Scripture to at least include the twelve apostles at Jerusalem.

• In Ephesians 1:13 Paul teaches the Ephesians, "having believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise."  While the idea of "sealing" is not exactly the same as "baptism," there is a correlation between the two.  Paul's reference to the word "promise" prompts us to ask "what promise?"  Promises and prophecies are not part of the mystery.  But neither is belief unto salvation part of the mystery, even though not every aspect of salvation was revealed all at once to any one penman of Scripture.  Paul could have simply stated that having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit, period.  However, the words "of promise" are inserted by Divine inspiration, and take us to the ministry of John the Baptist, and his promise that the Lord Jesus Christ would one day "baptize" believers "with" (Gk. en) [the] Holy Spirit (Mat. 3:11).  This promise was reiterated by the Lord in Acts 1:5, and the fulfillment of this promise took place on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Ghost was "poured out" upon those who believed (see Acts 2:17; 10:45).  [Note the 'mode' of that baptism, (pouring), of which John's baptism was a type].

        We suggest that believers at Ephesus had by this time lost all of the spiritual gifts of the earthly kingdom.  They were no longer grafted into Israel's position of spiritual blessing depicted in Romans 11 because that place of blessing no longer existed.  It was cancelled by the pronouncement of blindness upon corporate Israel at Acts 28:28.  Was the church now defunct?  By no means!  Paul unfolds to them wonderful spiritual blessings never before made known, blessings in the heavenlies that far exceed anything that had previously been spoken of.  But along with that, by using the words "of promise," Paul purposefully links these Ephesian believers to the mighty work of God, the church of the living God, that had its doctrinal and historical beginning at Pentecost.

        Based on the testimony of Scripture, we believe the unfolding of this current dispensation did not terminate the church that came into being on the day of Pentecost.  As God's program with Israel progressed, first with the kingdom offer by members of that original church, then with His ministry of blindness and the Divine hardening of Israel's heart, and finally with the temporary casting aside of Israel, and the subsequent full revelation of the mystery to believers in that church, these saints remained in Gods "gathering," the church, receiving whatever blessings God, in His sovereign mercy, dispensed to them.

Be sure to read our article entitled

 Acts Dispensationally Considered

or

Return to ThyTestimonies.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WebCounter
visitor number