Introduction
For many Christians, their concept of
pentecost is confined to the historical record of Acts 2. Now Acts 2
is a wonderful Scripture but we cannot properly understand the
events of that momentous day if we ignore the teaching that lies
behind it preserved elsewhere in Scripture—indeed, the very name
pentecost (or
fiftieth day) reminds us
that it is not a stand–alone feast but is founded on what has gone
before. Again, very few believers appear to ask why the feast of
pentecost was fulfilled by the events of Acts 2. To accept the fact
of this fulfilment is one thing, but to understand
why is quite another.
This indifference is baffling when you consider how much controversy
there has been over the details of that great day (such as speaking
in tongues). To confine study to a single chapter will never produce
an accurate understanding of any subject (see 2 Tim. 1: 13; 2 Pet.
1: 20).
Pentecost is actually one of seven annual set
feasts of Jehovah (see Lev. 23)—the others being (in order)
passover, unleavened bread, first–fruits, trumpets, the day of
atonement and tabernacles. These feasts have a prophetic character,
and the number seven (describing a complete period) splits naturally
into four and three. The first four feasts in the calendar have been
fulfilled in Israel’s history (see Acts 2: 1; 1 Cor. 5: 7; 8; 15:
20), while three await fulfilment. Pentecost sits in the middle of
the seven as the last of the fulfilled feasts.
The Feast of
Weeks
Pentecost is the Greek term for the Hebrew
feast of weeks, so–called because of its peculiar timing: “And ye
shall count from the morning after the sabbath, from the day that ye
brought the sheaf of the wave–offering, seven weeks; they shall be
complete; even unto the morning after the seventh sabbath shall ye
count fifty days” (Lev. 23: 15). Now “the morning after the sabbath”
referred to is the feast of first–fruits (see v11), which is a
picture of the resurrection of Christ: “but now Christ is raised
from among [the] dead, first–fruits of those fallen asleep” (1 Cor.
15: 20). The Lord was raised on the first day of the week (or the
morning after the sabbath—see Matt. 28: 1; Mark 16: 9; Luke 24: 1;
John 20: 1). This means that the fiftieth day is the
eighth return of the
resurrection day (hence Whit Sunday, from huit,
the French for eight). The
number eight is significant, for in Scripture it signifies a new
beginning. Thus, for example, circumcision was on the eighth day
(see Gen. 17: 12), Noah stepped out onto a new earth as one of eight
(see 1 Pet. 3: 20; 2 Pet. 2: 5), David, the new king, was
the eighth son of Jesse (1 Sam. 17: 12, 14) and the cleansing of the
leper was completed on the eighth day (Lev. 14: 10, 23).
My first point then, is that
pentecost is a new beginning. That new beginning was offered
by Peter to the Jews (see Acts 2: 38–40; 3: 19–21). Why? Because
though they had crucifed Christ, God had raised Him from the dead,
and in grace he was providing them with an opportunity for
repentance and redemption.
Now although pentecost is a new beginning, that
does not mean that everything was in place on day one (the popular
term ‘the birthday of the Church’ tends to perpetuate this
inaccurate idea). Certainly following the Holy Spirit falling upon
the disciples (see Acts 2: 4; 11: 15) the Assembly (or Church) as a
distinct body comes into view (see Acts 5: 11; 8: 1 etc.) but times
of refreshing (see Acts 3: 19) were still being offered to the
nation, and Peter is using “the keys” (not of the Assembly) but “of
the kingdom of the heavens” (Matt. 16: 19). There is clearly a
significant element of transition (and even hiatus) in the record of
the book of Acts. The concept of the Assembly was initially limited
to the remnant in Israel, although Peter’s words (see Acts 2: 39)
were wide enough in scope to allow the entrance of the Gentiles
later. This is not to say that there is any thought of the mystery
in the feast of pentecost. Gentiles being blessed in association
with Jews was long foretold (see Is. 2: 2; Jer. 3: 17; Ezek. 38: 23;
Zeph. 3: 9; Zech. 14: 16; Rom. 15: 9–12 etc.), but the idea of Jew
and Gentile assimilated into one new man (see Eph. 2: 15) was
“hidden throughout the ages” (Eph. 3: 9). Thus the gleaning of the
harvest left “unto the poor and to the stranger” (see Lev. 23: 22),
while clearly setting forth Gentile blessing, has nothing directly
to do with what was revealed to the apostle Paul (see Eph. 3: 3, 8,
9).
The Feast of
First–fruits
Everything on the day of pentecost in Acts 2
proceeds from the fact of Christ’s resurrection. Leviticus 23 itself
suggests this, in the way it connects the feast of pentecost with
the preceding feast of first–fruits. Firstly, the text flows
unbroken from the feast of first–fruits through to the feast of
weeks without the usual introductory ‘Speak unto the children of
Israel’. Secondly, it is impossible to count the days to pentecost
without having first begun at the feast of first–fruits (see Num.
28: 26). The inevitable conclusion is that pentecostal blessing is
founded on Christ’s resurrection. All must be preceded by the waving
of the sheaf of first–fruits before Jehovah “to be accepted
for you” (Lev. 23: 11;
my emphasis).
My second point then, is that
pentecost is a new beginning founded on the resurrection of Christ.
There is no new beginning without it—the Jews crucified Christ, but
God raised Him from the dead (see Acts 2: 32, 36), hence Peter’s
exhortation to “repent, and be baptised,
each one of you, in the
name of Jesus Christ, for remission of sins, and ye will receive the
gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2: 38, my emphasis).
Now it is not difficult to see that the feast
of first–fruits is typical of life out of death—the grain has been
sown into the ground, and the sheaf of the first–fruits is the
evidence of the life that results (see Lev. 23: 10). The imagery of
the sowing of seed with a view to life would have been well–known to
the Jews: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except the grain of wheat
falling into the ground die, it abides alone; but if it die, it
bears much fruit” (John 12: 24). Indeed, the imagery is perfect, for
in germinating, the outer casing (or ‘body’) of the seed dies. The
feast of first–fruits is therefore a picture of Christ raised from
the dead—the first–fruits (see 1 Cor. 15: 20, 23) of many more
resurrections to come. But what is the feast of pentecost a picture
of?
Two Loaves
There are several parallels between the feast of
first–fruits and the feast of pentecost, not least the fact that
both consist primarily of wave– offerings before Jehovah. However,
therein lies also the most obvious difference, for while in the
earlier feast this wave–offering consisted of the first sheaf of the
barley harvest, in the later feast it was made up of two loaves of
wheaten bread. Now just as the sheaf was the key to understanding
the feast of first–fruits, so the loaves are critical to grasping
the meaning of pentecost.
Many think that the two loaves (Lev. 23: 17)
represent Jew and Gentile, but the OT idea of blessing for the
nations involved subservience: “In those days shall ten men take
hold, out of all languages of the nations, shall even take hold of
the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you; for we
have heard [that] God is with you” (Zech. 8: 23). There was no
thought of equivalence as pictured in the two loaves. Furthermore,
any supposed Gentile loaf could only anticipative in character, for
clearly no Gentiles were blessed in Acts 2. Certainly Paul laboured
“that the offering up of the nations might be acceptable” (Rom. 15:
16), but this does not prove that the Gentiles were to be offered
independently of the Jews. In any case, the whole idea that the two
loaves in Lev. 23: 17 represent Jew and Gentile is
conclusively dismissed
by what is said in 1 Cor. 10: 17, namely that “we, [being] many, are
one loaf, one body” (my
emphasis; see also 1 Cor. 12: 13).
Others advocate the idea that the two loaves
refer to the house of Judah and the house of Israel, but this
division came centuries later as a result of sin (see 1 Kings 11:
30-39), and it cannot be right that God would have such an event
encapsulated in his feasts. The fact is, those present on the day of
pentecost were described as “Jews, pious men” (Acts 2: 5), and Peter
addresses some of them later as “Men of Judaea, and all ye
inhabitants of Jerusalem” (v14)—that is, of the house of Judah, and
not Israel. Even if there might have been a few individuals
descended from the northern tribes among the Jews, those few crumbs
would not, in any credible sense, make a loaf!
In Scripture, two is the number of adequate
witness (see Deut.19: 15; 2 Cor. 13: 1; Heb. 10: 28), and this is
surely the real force of the twin loaves in Lev. 23.
My third point then, is that
pentecost is fundamentally about witness (the idea of loaves
rather than simply grains, may give the idea of unity of witness).
This witness concerned the resurrection of Christ, for the evidence
is overwhelming that the disciples were to be witnesses of that
stupendous fact (see Acts 1: 8, 22; 2: 32; 3: 15; 4: 33; 5: 32; 13:
30, 31; 1 Cor. 15: 15 etc.). However, the witness was also
accompanied by a stark notice of the peril of rejecting God’s offer
of a new beginning, and this warning (as we shall see) was conveyed
by the phenomenon of speaking in tongues. However, before we
consider what was witnessed, let us consider the witnesses
themselves. To do this, we must look at:
Oil and Leaven
Now the feast of first–fruits (speaking of the
resurrection of Christ) had an oblation or meat–offering associated
with it of “two tenths of fine flour mingled with oil, an offering
by fire to Jehovah for a sweet odour” (Lev. 23: 13). The fine flour
speaks of the beautiful texture of the Lord’s life that was so
pleasing to the Father. The oil, symbolic of the Holy Spirit, is
seen here
mingled with the flour, speaking of a life completely blended
with the will of God. The divine answer to the ending of that life
was the resurrection.
The feast of pentecost was somewhat different,
for the oblation there is the wave–offering itself. Lev. 23: 16, 17
tells us that “ye shall present a new oblation to Jehovah. Out of
your dwellings shall ye bring two wave–loaves, of two tenths of fine
flour; with leaven shall they be baken; [as] first–fruits to
Jehovah”. The fact of it being a
new oblation is emphasised, and also its origin as taken
out of the dwellings
of the children of Israel. So believers, not Christ, are now in
view, and their character is as the “first–fruits to Jehovah”
(v17)—not of the barley harvest, but of the later wheat harvest (see
Exod. 9: 31, 32; Ruth 2: 23). Pentecost was literally the beginning
of the wheat harvest (see Exod. 34: 22), and this feature of the
feast is illustrated in Acts 2 when “there were added in that day
about three thousand souls” (v41). In this evangelical context, the
joyful language of Deut. 16 (speaking about pentecost) is fitting:
“and thou shalt rejoice before Jehovah thy God” (v11). However, the
new oblation could not be offered alone, for the priest was to
“present with the bread seven he–lambs without blemish, yearlings,
and one young bullock, and two rams: they shall be a burnt–offering
to Jehovah with their oblation, and their drink–offerings, an
offering by fire of a sweet odour to Jehovah … And the priest shall
wave them with the bread of the first-fruits as a wave–offering
before Jehovah” (Lev. 23: 18, 20). Thus, if many believed in Acts 2,
they could only be presented to God accompanied by what speaks of
the death of Christ. This was a hard lesson for the Jew to learn.
There are other notable differences between
this new oblation and the oblation of the feast of first–fruits. In
the latter, we read of fine flour mingled with oil (see Lev. 23:
13), and seeing as the Holy Spirit is so prominent in Acts 2 we
might expect to find the oil mentioned again in the new oblation.
However, this is not the case. The fine flour is there, because it
speaks of the moral features of Christ replicated in the believer,
although now it is presented as loaves, baked with leaven. Leaven
always typifies what is evil (see Matt. 16: 6; Mark 8: 15), and as
Scripture tells us, “a little leaven leavens the whole lump” (Gal.
5: 9). There is therefore clearly something of a contrast intended
between the leaven, picturing the sinful nature of man,
contaminating his whole being, and the “flour mingled with oil”
(Lev. 23: 13) that so typified Christ. Hence the only way that man
can be presented to God as a wave–offering (even a believing man
characterised in part by the features of the fine flour) is if the
fine flour is
baked into loaves. Why? Because the fire nullifies the action of
the leaven. Now it is
this presentation of
the Spirit of God (rather than the oil) that we see on the day of
pentecost. Hence: “And there appeared to them parted tongues, as of
fire, and it sat upon each one of them” (Acts 2: 3). Upon the Lord
Jesus Himself, the Holy Spirit descended “as a dove” (Luke 3: 22)
for that was man walking in perfection, but in relation to the
Lord’s people, the Spirit came by fire in keeping with the baking of
Leviticus 23: 17.
My fourth point then, is that the witness of pentecost was to be
delivered by ordinary men of “like passions to us” (James 5: 17),
but who were “filled with [the] Holy Spirit” (Acts 2: 4).
This idea of a baked oblation is very
interesting to consider in a modern context, and the supposed
revival of ‘pentecostal gifts’. A sober assessment is that much of
what is claimed to be the Holy Spirit at work seems to bear more of
the character of leaven rather than the fine flour, however
exuberant and impressive the outward manifestation. Just as at
Corinth, (significantly, an assembly that came “short in no gift”—1
Cor. 1: 7) the cult of human personality rather than Christ is
dominant, despite the apostle’s warning that those go down that path
are “yet carnal” (1 Cor. 3: 3). Now to be carnal is to act in the
power of the flesh, and in this context, it is quite remarkable how
the disciples apparently waited seven weeks after the resurrection
before they said anything about it to the world at large. On a
purely human level it might be thought impossible to exercise
restraint in the light of such a stunning display of the power of
God—although the “fear of the Jews” (John 20: 19; see Mark 16: 8)
was very real. The difference between the disciples’ demeanour
before and after the events of Acts 2 is marked, and there is no
doubt that the feast of pentecost typifies the reception of power
from God to witness for Christ. As the Lord Himself told the
disciples “and ye are
witnesses of these
things … but do ye remain in the city till ye be clothed with
power from on high …
ye will receive
power, the Holy Spirit
having come upon you, and ye shall be
my witnesses both in
Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and to the end of the
earth” (Luke 24: 48, 49; Acts 1: 7, 8, my emphasis). The thought
behind pentecost is therefore not so much a literal resurrection (as
with Christ and the feast of first–fruits), but believers in the
practical gain of the “power of
his resurrection” (Phil.
3: 10; my emphasis). This could not happen until the Holy Spirit had
been received.
Since Christ rose from the dead on the feast of
first–fruits, the counting of the seven weeks until pentecost began
from that same day, for the day of the resurrection was the “morrow
of the sabbath” (Luke 24: 1) matching “the morning after the sabbath
… that ye brought the sheaf of the wave–offering” (Lev. 23: 15). It
is on the very same “first [day] of the week” that the Lord breathed
into his disciples saying “receive [the] Holy Spirit” (John 20: 19,
22)—the first day of counting down to the feast of pentecost. The
last day of counting was, of course, the day of pentecost itself
when the disciples “were all filled with [the] Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:
4). Thus, although the Lord sent the disciples in John 20: 21 (just
as the Father had previously sent the Son) they did not attempt to
answer to the command until they had received power.
It of significance, therefore, that pentecost
was the only feast associated with a command to
count the days until
it took place (see Lev. 23: 15). The thought of
anticipation was
clearly a critical part of its character. That same anticipation we
also see in relation to the disciples waiting for the Holy Spirit:
“but do ye remain in the city till ye be clothed with power from on
high … to await the promise of my Father” (Luke 24: 49; Acts 1: 4).
The Lord had died on passover, had risen from the dead on the feast
of first–fruits, and a further forty days had elapsed before He was
taken up into heaven (see Acts 1: 3). In the interval between the
Lord’s ascension and the descent of the Holy Spirit the disciples
thus “gave themselves all with one accord to continual prayer” (v14)
in keeping with what had been recorded earlier in Luke 11: 13. As
observant Jews, the disciples would have already been counting down
the remaining ten days to the feast of pentecost (see Acts 1: 3),
and this was now accompanied by a parallel expectancy relating to
the promise of the Father.
The mere anticipation of an event, however,
does not, in itself, tell you anything about the event itself.
It is the waving of the two baked loaves before Jehovah (see Lev. 23:
17) that is fulfilled in Acts 2—the counting down is merely
a confirmatory associated detail. What is presented in Acts 2 is
things coming together at the very moment “the day of Pentecost was
now accomplishing” (Acts 2: 1), namely
the witnesses of the resurrection being empowered
by the Holy Spirit to speak
the great things of God (see v 11). Chief among those great
things was the resurrection of Christ, and yet the message was
delivered in a most peculiar way. This brings us to the subject of:
Speaking in
Tongues
There is no doubt that speaking in tongues was
prominent on the day of pentecost in Acts 2—hardly surprising when
we are told elsewhere that the
evidence for the gift
of the spirit being poured out was “they heard them speaking with
tongues and magnifying God” (Acts 10: 46; see v45; 11: 15; 19: 6).
Of the five signs spoken of by the Lord in resurrection in Mark 16:
17, 18, four had
already been given to
Israel in the synoptic gospels (see Matt. 10: 1; Luke 10: 19 etc.).
The phenomenon of speaking in tongues, however, was
new and elicited a
question in those Jews who witnessed it (“What would this mean?—Acts
2: 12), and it is clear that significance was to be attached to the
phenomenon. Peter answers the question by proclaiming “this is that
which was spoken through the prophet Joel” (v 16), and quotes a
passage which is a precursor to the coming kingdom, and speaks of a
delivered remnant of the nation who will then call upon Jehovah for
salvation. He then goes on to preach, closing with the words “be
saved from this perverse generation” (v40). The meaning is evident:
having crucified the Messiah, Israel was in peril, and the tongues
were a sign of this—on each historical mention in Acts, Jews are
present. Every Jew would know that tongues were introduced to
scatter man at Babel (see Gen. 11: 1-9), and those prepared to read
a few lines further on in Joel would know that the prophet also
foretold a
Jewish scattering away
from the land by a foreign power (see Joel 3: 2). As Paul says
(quoting Is. 28: 11, 12; see Jer. 5: 15), “tongues are for a sign,
not to those who believe, but to unbelievers” (1 Cor. 14: 22). Thus,
the Lord Jesus had foretold that Jerusalem would be “encompassed
with armies” (Luke 21: 20), and her people “led captive into all the
nations” (v24). As Moses had prophesied centuries before, “Jehovah
will bring a nation against thee from afar, from the end of the
earth, like as the eagle flieth,
a nation whose tongue thou understandest not” (Deut. 28: 49; my
emphasis). All this was fulfilled in AD70, when the Romans under
Titus sacked Jerusalem, and exiled the Jews throughout the world.
Hence to hear foreign tongues spoken on the day of pentecost was a
forewarning of what might come—an army of foreigners sent in
judgment upon the nation if it did not repent.
Thus the emphasis of the message delivered by
Peter in Acts 2 is not what God has done for the sinner, but the
contrast between what God has done for Jesus and what the Jews did
to Him. The Jews crucified Jesus, but God has raised Him from the
dead, and re-stated His declaration that His Son is “both Lord and
Christ” (Acts 2: 36). In one sense, tongues were God’s last message
to Israel before His judgment fell. Once it had fallen, tongues had
no more purpose—the sign (see Mark 16: 17) was no longer required.
In this respect it is of interest that the feast of pentecost was
not seven days like that of the feast of unleavened bread or the
feast of tabernacles (see Lev. 23: 6–8; 33–36)—both speaking of
complete periods—but
one day. Pentecost is a very short and limited feast, and this
is in keeping with what Paul tells us, namely that “tongues, they
shall cease” (1 Cor. 13: 8).
Hence my fifth and final point is that pentecost is also a warning of
coming judgment on Israel if they rejected the witness to Him God
has made “both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2: 36). Seeing as that
judgment has now fallen, it is impossible (as some allege) to ‘get
back to pentecost’. God has left off appealing to Israel, paving the
way for what we have now, namely the introduction of the truth of
the mystery of Jew and Gentile united and equal in the Assembly. The
modern phenomenon of so–called tongue-speaking is to be rejected as
bearing no relation whatsoever to what has been revealed in the
Word.
Conclusion
Little more needs to be said apart from to recap
the main points:
- Pentecost
was a new beginning offered to the Jews.
- That new
beginning was founded on the resurrection of Christ.
- Pentecost
was fundamentally about witness to the resurrection.
- The witness
was to be delivered by ordinary men empowered by the power of
the Holy Spirit.
- The witness
was delivered by speaking in tongues, which was a warning of
impending judgment on the nation if they rejected the message.
This is what the Bible teaches. Of course, to
Christian ears, pentecost is perhaps the most familiar of the “set
feasts of Jehovah” (Lev. 23: 4), but at the same time, its force and
meaning is largely obscured by the teachings of men. By contrast,
Scripture will reward those who are prepared to seek out its
treasures, and it is hoped that this inadequate study will stimulate
the reader to dig further in that direction.
