The Modern  American Church, or would the real Jesus Christ please stand up.

       About a week ago, a family member asked me, just what do I expect Christians to do. This was in reference to my laments about why my wife died, why didn’t prayer work, why I was having such a hard time with the grieving process, all sorts of things. I suspect that some were thinking I ought to just put it all in the poop happens category of life. But, what many do not understand, Is that the death of your life partner just doesn’t end with the personal wrenching away of the person you love. My wife and I weren’t well off enough to just do anything we wanted, but what we did, we did together. As I told some people on different forums, true marriage is not easy come, easy go. It entails a strange math. Biblically, the original model Is, two becoming one. And when that happens, a strange physiological bond happens. If you’ve never experienced the synchronization of heart beats, then you might not understand. The math goes like this. Two become one, but two minus the one, becomes half. It’s sort of a dangerous proposition, to be so vulnerable, that two people can meld together In unison. This doesn’t imply a loss. One isn’t giving up their personality, their individual dreams, or anything like that. It’s not a force of subjugation. It is a forging of doing the best for the other, to regard the other as yourself. We didn’t always agree with each other, but we always came to an agreement. Usually a compromise. And that was perfectly fine with me. She never made me feel smothered, and I do not think I did her.

That’s’ just the background of why my grief was so intense. And still Is. It’s in the acceptance phase, a progression where you actually understand that you’ve lost your other half. And there Is nothing you can do to change that.

But that question, made me think, just what do I expect of Christians? First off, let’s rephrase the question. What does God expect of Christians? And I thought, well, let’s research the differences between the  Modern church, and the foundational church In the Book of Acts.

inspiring, sometimes uncomfortable—for the modern Christian church. How we “measure up” depends a lot on what aspects we’re looking at and which expressions of the modern church we have in mind. Here’s a clear, balanced comparison.

1. Community and Shared Life

Acts church

  • Believers shared life deeply (Acts 2:42–47).
  • Radical generosity—resources were given so “there were no needy persons among them.”
  • Faith was lived publicly and relationally, not privately.

Modern church

  • Strengths: Many churches emphasize small groups, care ministries, and outreach.
  • Gaps: Western churches often reflect individualism—faith can become private, compartmentalized, or consumer-oriented.
  • Financial generosity exists, but sacrificial sharing of life is less common.

Summary: We often excel at programs more than communal living.

2. Power and Presence of the Holy Spirit

Acts church

  • The Holy Spirit is central, not symbolic.
  • Guidance, boldness, miracles, discernment, and suffering are all Spirit-driven.
  • Prayer precedes action.

Modern church

  • Strengths: Many churches teach about the Spirit and encourage prayer.
  • Gaps: In some traditions, reliance on strategy, branding, or leadership charisma overshadows spiritual dependence.
  • Other traditions may emphasize the Spirit but lack grounding or accountability.

Summary: We often talk about the Spirit more than we wait on the Spirit.

3. Mission and Witness

Acts church

  • Evangelism was organic and unavoidable.
  • Believers shared faith as a natural overflow of transformed lives.
  • Persecution didn’t stop the mission—it spread it.

Modern church

  • Strengths: Global missions, technology, humanitarian work, and evangelistic resources.
  • Gaps: Fear of offense, cultural pressure, or comfort can mute everyday witness.
  • Evangelism is sometimes delegated to professionals rather than embraced as communal identity.

Summary: We are often better equipped—but less bold.

4. Leadership and Authority

Acts church

  • Leadership was servant-oriented and plural (apostles, elders, deacons).
  • Authority was spiritual, not institutional.
  • Leaders suffered alongside the people.

Modern church

  • Strengths: Training, theological education, organizational clarity.
  • Gaps: Celebrity culture, hierarchical distance, and burnout.
  • Success can be measured by numbers rather than faithfulness.

Summary: We are often more organized, but sometimes less embodied.

5. Suffering and Cost

Acts church

  • Following Jesus was costly and expected to be.
  • Suffering was interpreted as participation in Christ, not failure.

Modern church

  • Strengths: Emphasis on hope, healing, and God’s care.
  • Gaps: In some contexts, suffering is avoided or spiritualized away.
  • Comfort can become a substitute for discipleship.

Summary: The early church expected hardship; we often try to manage around it.

A Fair and Hopeful Conclusion

The modern church does not simply fail compared to Acts—but it often looks different because the context is different.

What hasn’t changed:

  • The same Spirit
  • The same gospel
  • The same call to love God and neighbor

What has changed:

  • Cultural power dynamics
  • Social structures
  • Expectations of comfort and safety

The Book of Acts isn’t just a benchmark it’s an invitation .Not to replicate first-century methods, but to recover first-century dependence, courage, and love.If the Book of Acts could speak directly to the modern church—especially to us, here and now—it would probably sound less like a rebuke and more like a loving, unsettling question.

“Do you still expect God to show up?”

Acts would notice our buildings, our budgets, our statements of faith, and our schedules—and then quietly ask whether we still leave room for interruption. In Acts, plans were held loosely. The Spirit redirected sermons, travel routes, and entire lives. Today we often ask God to bless what we’ve already decided instead of daring to wait for what He might disrupt.

Acts might also ask,

“When did safety become a virtue?”

The early believers did not chase persecution, but they assumed obedience would be costly. Courage wasn’t a personality trait; it was the natural result of resurrection faith. Acts would look at how carefully we manage risk—social, financial, reputational—and wonder whether we still believe Jesus is alive, or merely respected.

Then there’s community.

“Why are you so lonely together? ”

Acts would marvel at how many Christians can gather without really sharing life. The early church didn’t grow because it was polished; it grew because it was porous. Lives overlapped. Meals mattered. Needs were visible. Faith was practiced in kitchens and courtyards, not mainly on stages.

Acts might linger on our language.

“Why do you speak of the Spirit in the past tense?”

For the first believers, the Spirit wasn’t a doctrine to defend but a presence to obey. They prayed expecting guidance. They listened expecting correction. They moved expecting power—and sometimes pain. Acts would not shame us for structure or theology, but it might ask whether our confidence rests more in systems than in surrender.

And finally, Acts might say something surprisingly gentle:

“You are not late.”

The same God who ignited a small, frightened group in Jerusalem is still at work. Acts would remind us that renewal never begins with institutions—it begins with people who pray honestly, love sacrificially, and obey quickly. The church in Acts wasn’t strong because it was perfect; it was alive because it was dependent.

If Acts is a message to us, it isn’t “Become us.” It’s “Trust Him again.”

Not nostalgically. Not performatively. But courageously—right where we are.

So, that’s what I think God expects of Christians. To regain what was lost, to continue what was gained.

When I think about these things, I can honestly say how I feel about it all. I believe with all my heart, that If the modern church, and yes even most charismatic churches, were a model of the Book of Acts church, my wife would not have died. This is nothing to argue about. The text of the Bible clearly proves itself in that regard. Am I disappointed that the modern church seems to have lost that Power delivered to the Apostles. Of course. As all Christians should. We ought be agonizing over that loss. Many of our diseased loved ones likely would still be here. And regardless of the more radical cessationists , cannot uphold their position by scripture. There is absolutely no scripture that hints or says the Acts Church was ever supposed to stop In function. Nothing at all. So when they attempt to say the proof is in the pudding, it’s nothing but an admission that the church lost something, and simply left it lie The question should never be asked to a person, what do they expect a Christian to be. It’s always what does God expect us to be. For the most part, we have failed. And no amount of him hawing can relieve that.  I still feel anger sometimes. Not a God, but at a church universal, which has let go of the Hand of God. A church perhaps more concerned with quantity rather than quality. A church of numbers, and and popularity and approval. Approval that refuses to push the boundaries, for fear of ridicule. And who am I? I fell into those traps myself. I don’t blame God, I blame me.