The Benefit of Waiting
(Acts 1:1-7)
Author anonymous
Preliminaries
The author of the Acts of the Apostles is undisputed: it
is Luke, the physician, who wrote the Gospel which also bears his name.
He is a historian, but one who acknowledges (clearly, here in verse 2) the
power of the Holy Spirit in his writing. In this there is wisdom, for
Luke clearly is not an eyewitness of the Resurrection. We know little
enough about him, but it is most likely that he is a convert to
Christianity taught by Paul. His method in both books is plain: he is a
researcher. He gathers the words and evidence of others to produce his
book.
In one sense this is a terrible blow to the fundamentalist
school of "automatic writing." This school holds that all the books of
the Bible were written by the Holy Spirit - the nominal authors just held
the pen while the Spirit moved their hands. If so, why the careful
research? But in another sense Acts can be called the "history of the
Holy Spirit." For as the Gospels were the biography of Christ, in a
sense, Acts records what the Spirit did through the church. No book of
the Bible expounds more clearly the work of the Holy Spirit.
Doctrine
There are three principles of doctrine - what we might call
analytic principles - which are shown in Acts:
•
Doctrine is best revealed in action.
Many writers have taken bits and pieces of the Bible and constructed
strange doctrines from them, assuring their hearers that this is the word
of God. But in Acts, we see how the Apostles themselves "did it." We can
be sure, therefore, that this is what they saw as the result of sound
doctrine. Therefore, we can reason backwards from their actions to the
doctrine behind it, carefully checking it with other Scriptures as we go.
•
Doctrine occurs in time and space. Doctrine is not abstract; it
is specific in application. Peter, for example, was shown that the Gospel
was to be preached to the Gentiles - a point revealed in the Old
Testament, by the way - and from that we can conclude that it should be
preached to any and all who will hear it. So the principle remains the
same; the application in our time may be quite different.
•
Doctrine must result in action. If ever there is a lesson in
Acts, this is it. Doctrine is not the idle speculation of Bible teachers
and preachers; it is the word in action. I give you Thomas à Kempis'
rule: for any doctrinal question, suppose you absolutely knew the
answer. Would it make any difference in your conduct? If not, you don't
have a doctrinal question.
Let us therefore begin - by waiting.
Waiting for God
(Acts 1:1-8 NIV) In my
former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to
teach {2} until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving
instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen. {3}
After his suffering, he showed himself to these men and gave many
convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of
forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God. {4} On one occasion, while
he was eating with them, he gave them this command: "Do not leave
Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard
me speak about. {5} For John baptized with water, but in a few days you
will be baptized with the Holy Spirit." {6} So when they met together,
they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom
to Israel?" {7} He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or
dates the Father has set by his own authority. {8} But you will receive
power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in
Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."
John Chrysostom put it this way: "It cannot be that a
man should enjoy the benefit of grace except he watch." Somehow,
intrinsically bound in the lives of the great saints, is the idea that
waiting for the Lord is a requirement of the Christian life. It is so
here.
Wait for "the promise."
The word used here is unique in the New Testament:
perimeno. It comes from the Greek words "peri" (from which we get
our word "perimeter") and meno, which means "a place." In other words,
the word "wait" used here means "stay in place." Other words used
frequently mean things like "to expect fully" or "to stand still." In all
these senses there is the idea of being in one spot, waiting calmly. For
this, we have no patience at all. Neither did the disciples.
The impatience of the disciples
The question they ask displays their impatience: is now
the time when you will restore the kingdom? We may see in the question
some of the aspects of waiting:
•
The Disciples Wait
There is a curious example here: Christ tells the men to return to Jerusalem from Galilee - and wait. This brings us some questions:
Why the wait - at all?
Why not just send the Holy Spirit immediately? After all,
there was the Ascension right in front of their eyes?
•
Why in Jerusalem?
Why were they commanded to stay in one place - and in
particular that one most dangerous of places?
Why "in a few days?"
Why wasn't Jesus specific about it? Why didn't he say, "at
Pentecost?"
Why do we "wait upon the Lord?"
I said that we learn by example from the Apostles. So then, what shall we learn from their example here? Why are we required to "wait upon the Lord?"
So that God might prepare us
Sometimes God is using the time of waiting to prepare us
for other things. We don't know what those things might be, so it would
be impertinent for us to claim that we are already prepared. So how is he
preparing us?
So that God may develop his providence
We are not the only ones that God is working with! Perhaps
you are already suited to the purpose at hand - though not perfect, of
course - but God is still working on someone else! We need to wait
patiently:
So that we may know that He is God.
Often our impatience is the result of our knowing that "we
can do it." Why is God holding us back?