Acts 4:32-37 – Of one heart and soul

In this blog series, I’m going to take a look at the book of Acts from a strategic point of view. What was going on in the days of the early church and what can we learn from it today in the 21^st Century?

After the believers reconvene after Peter & John’s trial, it says that they were of “One heart and one soul.” Or in the NIV, “One heart and one mind”. In the Greek, the meaning of ‘heart’ is “thoughts or feelings”. This tallies with the Hebraic understanding of heart. The heart is where you think. “As a man thinks in his heart, so he is.” Proverbs 23:7.

The word ‘soul’ means “breath” relating to the Hebrew word Ruach, which means breath or spirit. A better way to think of this is that the word ‘soul’ is referring to having the same animating force.

It's inspiring to read about a church that operated as a body unified in thought and feeling, and were all filled with the same spirit. This is shown in the example given about how they would have no needy person among them, and would readily sell possessions for anyone in need. A church united in heart and soul is a powerful combination, but can we have a church like that today?

Thought

To be of one thought means that we must believe the same things, we must want the same things, and we must agree how we are going to go about achieving it. In this passage, the believers were all in agreement in their belief that there should be no poverty amongst them, they agreed that they wanted zero poverty, and they agreed that the best way to go about it was to be willing to sacrifice their own possessions if needed to make it happen.

Having a church that believes the same thing isn’t easy. Our congregants come from different backgrounds, life experiences, and jobs. So uniting people together in belief is tricky.

The Statement of Faith is the most classic way to bring this together in a church setting, but it does have some problems. Usually, a Statement of Belief explains what you believe, but it virtually never explains how you came to the decision to believe something. That’s what’s referred to as epistemology, and it’s arguably more important that what you believe. Think of it like an algebra equation, the answer Is your belief. If all you have is the equation and the answer, you leave people thinking, “how did they come to that conclusion?” Whereas when you show your working (epistemology), you take people on the journey with you. If your church knows that a well thought through epistemological process has been undertaken, you’ll create greater unity in what you believe, even if people disagree with your conclusion. There is still unity because of the epistemology.

When it comes to wanting the same things, this speaks to your mission and your vision. Your mission is why your church exists. It’s the long term fight you’re engaged in. For churches, that’s a version of The Great Commission, to make disciples of all nations. Your vision is where your church is going. These will be your key objectives you’re looking to achieve. Your mission must always be more important than your vision. If you put vision before mission, you’ll find yourself completing a vision, but losing your identity in the process. Rather like Jesus warning us not to gain the whole world but forfeiting our soul.   

Lastly, You’ve got to agree on how you’re going to achieve your objectives. This is where most arguments come in church. We can all agree on the first two, but how we are to go about it always runs the risk of causing division. Every strategy has its weaknesses, there’s no such thing as a perfect strategy. This is why it’s important to have consensus in the leadership team as to the plan. And this is why thinking.church exists, to help you get to consensus so that you can move forward united as a leadership team.

Beyond the leadership team, it’s important that various groups have differing levels of buy in. Not everyone gets to be in the room when you’re creating the church’s plan, it’s impossible as soon as there’s over 20 people in your church. Added to which, not everyone wants to be part of the co-creation team. The next layer are those who should be consulted on the plan, these are your trustees, who hold the church to account, making sure that things are done ethically, responsibly, and legally. They also should specialise in a certain area, like HR, so they can give clear advice regarding their specialism.

The next layers down are people that hold cultural influence in your church, and it is worth testing your ideas with them to see how they land. Next, identify the people that have to own the idea in their teams. You need to make sure you ‘sell’ the plan to them, allowing them to ask questions so they can fully understand it. Lastly, there will some people you just need to inform them what the plan is. 

Feelings

The second part of the Greek word for heart refers to the feelings. Simply put, you’ve got to genuinely love one another. You cannot be one in heart and hate each other, even if you do agree on your beliefs and plans. It doesn’t mean that you all need to be friends. It’s impossible for a church to grow and everyone to remain friends, but you do need to love one another.

Spirit

When it came to the early believers, what marked them out most was their reliance on the Holy Spirit. This church, from the very outset, was being lead by the Holy Spirit. In the modern church, it can be easy to put strategy at the forefront. And we’re fully aware of that here at thinking.church, we’re all about church strategy after all. But to be a people empowered by the Spirit means that strategy comes second to what the Holy Spirit is saying. Don’t get me wrong here, strategy is vital. If the Holy Spirit gives you a new direction, you need to put a strategy behind it, but our responsibility is to be first and foremost lead by what the Spirit is saying to the church.

This is why we as a church need to be continually spending time in the Word of God and the presence of God, but also in ‘fellowship’ to use a very old, church term. These times can make us of ‘one spirit’ that characterised the early church.