Self-Righteousness Dressed as Caring Christian Populism

The following is admittedly subjective, but based on decades of experience, interaction, and observation. Allow me to pause from my usual study style as I address an issue that I believe will be part of a future end-time deception; a Christianity not based on the cross and resurrection, but rather built on the supposed goodness of humankind.

populism noun

pop·​u·​lism ˈpä-pyə-ˌli-zəm 

a political philosophy or movement that represents or is claimed to represent the interests of ordinary people [plural] especially against the Establishment

Mirriam-Webster Dictionary (emphasis added)

Populism usually arises from a general discontent. … People feel that things are out of control, socially and economically. … The idea that this is the fault of the meritocratic elite is an easy sell. 

—Nicholas Lemann

… anti-government populism is beginning to give way to the more classic, anti-corporate populism … 

—Leslie Savan

… Elizabeth Warren summoned the familiar and fiery spirits of Democratic populism. "Our job is to fight for the families of America," the Massachusetts Senator yelled over applause. … "Stitch up the tax loopholes so that millionaires and billionaires pay at the same tax rate as the people in this room." 

—Jay Newton-Small


The move comes amid a rise in economic populism in the GOP, Republican strategist John Feehery told the Washington Examiner. Even as the party writ large is generally supportive of the business community, an insurgent crop of Republican lawmakers is pursuing a more working-class-friendly agenda … 

—Samantha-Jo Roth

"Populism" has always been the smiling face of harsh, authoritarian Socialism. I figured this out form my world history class in high school in the 1980s. From Marx to Lenin to Stalin to Mussolini to Hitler to the Mao to Ho Chi Mihn to Castro to Maduro to Labour to the DSA to the American Democratic Party to the current state of the GOP... it's all built on the idea that a powerful central government is needed to enforce the foundational beliefs of either end of supposed spectrum (including massive wealth distribution programs championed on both ends of the political spectrum). 

The reasoning given is always the same: we care and we will use force in the name of goodness and righteousness (as we define it) to take care of our lessers.

For wealth redistribution to happen to any degree, there must necessarily be an authoritarian government to exert its force over individual liberties and private property. One of the things these seeming opposites (Leftist Populism vs Rightist Populism) have is a hatred of private property and capitalism (the two things that have created more wealth, comfort, and health in the history of the world). And when they confiscate wealth from those who created it, they invariably take a generous chunk for themselves (but that's another matter).

As the youth in the West start to embrace the language and beliefs of Marxism, they do it in the comfort and with the advanced technology that western capitalism (free markets, I use "capitalism" because of common usage, but it's a Marxist term) has created for them.

The following are just a few examples of many populist quotes we could review from Adolf Hitler who is on the supposed Right (the sources are secondary referring to the original). 

“National Socialism derives from each of the two camps the pure idea that characterizes it, national resolution from bourgeois tradition; vital, creative socialism from the teaching of Marxism.”  [Source: Interview by Hanns Johst in Frankforter Volksblatt (January 27, 1934), quoted in David Schoenbaum, Hitler’s Social Revolution: Class and Status in Nazi Germany]

“Capitalism as a whole will now be destroyed, the whole people will now be free. We are not fighting Jewish or Christian capitalism, we are fighting very capitalism: we are making the people completely free.” [Source: April 12, 1921 speech via Hanover College course archives; Foundations of the Modern Age, Fall Semester 1998, Frank Luttmer]


“The Third Reich will always retain the right to control property owners. If you say that the bourgeoisie is tearing its hair over the question of private property, that does not affect me in the least. Does the bourgeoisie expect some consideration from me?... Today’s bourgeoisie is rotten to the core; it has no ideals any more; all it wants to do is earn money and so it does me what damage it can.” [Source: "Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy". Book by Avraham Barka]

Likewise, we could find numerous quotes from the other totalitarian Marxists, but I'll will just quote Stalin (on the supposed Left) to show that the assumed "opposites" had far more in common in their philosophies than many want to admit. And both murdered millions. 

“Without getting rid of the capitalists, without abolishing the principle of private property in the means of production, it is impossible to create a planned economy."[Source: Marxism Versus Liberalism by Josef Stalin]

 

Without the references or specific markers, the concepts and beliefs are almost identical. 

While in my high school class, I created a circular continuum listing various political parties and movements from history. The Left and the Right populists meet at essentially same place no matter which extreme you head towards. As you go farther Left the circle brings you back to the same place those going farther Right go. Again, it is not a straight line Left to Right continuum, but a circular line. 

There are variations on which ethnic or religious groups that might be persecuted under any particular system (and to what degree), but both "ideal" versions are built on some sort of hate. Whether it Hitler killing Jews or Stalin killing Jews or American Leftists celebrating the death or murder of Bible-believing Christians )and wishing death on more), hate is hidden under masks of works like "love" and "joy."

Strength Through Joy (KdF - Nazi Germany)

Vote Joy

Joy, and its companion, fun, are powerful political weapons — weapons that have been used successfully to undermine the ridiculous habits of white supremacy.

-Sheryll Cashin (Politico) september29, 2024

It may be seen as a stretch to connect Hitler with Kamala Harris, but the thinking is the same. To enact the programs each desired they would require absolute control over wealth, property, and liberties. Each one believes that people should cede rights, liberties, property, and even our children to a powerful centralized government for our own good. And it will all be in "joy" with an accompanying smile. You see, they're the good guys. They're the righteous ones and by extension the other side become the enemies of joy. Note how joy is connected to the boogeyman "white supremacy" on the American Left to be sure that hate is stirred under the guise of "joy." And I would add here that the burgeoning Democratic Socialist-Muslim alliance on the American Left is virulently antisemitic (just as some previous antisemitic movements in history).  

I would also add that if someone thinks the comparative is ridiculous, we all know the media would go berserk (with 24/7 coverage) if a candidate of whom they disapprove remotely reflected Nazi propaganda. The media and Left freak out when anyone to the right of Mao raises his arm. They scream "Nazi salute!" The choice of words is far more telling than some accidental gesture. The media is on the side of the authoritarians as they also pretend they speak for the "common man." 

The takeaway here is not to be taken in by the words they use. As is the biblical model, it is by their fruits (not their words) that will judge what they offer.

False Premises and False Conclusions from Darwin to Denominations

Logic is greatly misunderstood. We often think logic is based on what we think is obvious. However, that is not how logic works. At the the very base of logic is the idea of drawing a logical conclusion from established premises. The key being both the veracity of the premises and the undeniable (no alternative) to the conclusion drawn.

• Premise: Tom is a cat
• Premise: All cats are felines
• Conclusion: Tom is a feline

This may seem obvious, and to some degree it is. But even with this simple example we are asked to accept that (a) Tom is, in fact, a cat and that (b) all cats are felines. Again, we can show this, but that's the point. We cannot always simply assume a premise is true or that a conclusion is reliable.

• Premise: Tom is a cat
• Premise: All cats are gray
• Conclusion: Tom is gray

Here we see the logical conclusion that Tom is gray. However, the second premise (that all cats are gray) has never been established. If the second premise were true, then, yes, the conclusion would be both logical and sound. So, something can be a logical conclusion based on believed or even generally accepted premises, but that does not make that conclusion necessarily sound.

There are also two assumptions in the first argument. We assume Tom is indeed a cat and we also assume that all cats are felines. Now, that second point may seem crazy, but we have not examined and tested  every single cat who has ever lived to determine they are all felines. That might seem like we're stretching things a bit, but there are times when we assume truths which might not be true due to our limited scope. If someone grows up in a secluded area where all the cats are gray, she may be inclined to believe our second premise is true. 

When it comes to science, many things which are technically theories (that is, they've never been proven to be true or they have never been observed) which we treat as truths. Further, there are things assumed true (no longer considered theories) which either are impossible to test or do not hold up against all the evidence available. Finally, we assume some things are true based solely on our limited capacity to test the veracity of the belief.   

This is not a post on the subject of logic, so we'll have to leave that discussion where it is. We will now turn to Carl Sagan's argument for an enormous and wildly old universe.

The first problem is that the calculations for both age and distance are assumed to be consistent over millions and billions of years (necessarily trillions and quadrillions, etc. of years as no single point of origin can be pinpointed or even assumed). But, again, we will have to leave that where it is. 

Sagan himself, in his Cosmos PBS series, conveniently states that it is not necessary to go back beyond the supposed Big Bang (the dating of which has varied over the years, which in itself should make us question dating conclusions). But if matter is all there is, and matter cannot be created or destroyed (a law of science, not a theory, Law of Conservation of Mass in a closed system), it must then be eternal (having no origin). We must go back infinitely in time. The Big Bang theory itself is an argument against itself. We mention this only to show how the anti-biblical movement expects its adherents to have faith without using the word "faith." They ask that illogical premises be accepted despite our very real logical conclusion that inorganic matter cannot create itself.  

The numbers are incomprehensible. According to current scientific beliefs (Scientism), the nearest star in our own galaxy (Proxima Centauri, the nearest, mind you) is over 4 light years away. One light year equals 9,460,730,472,580 kilometers. Four light years is equal to 2.3514501 x 10 ¹³   Miles. Try to comprehend that number. Now recall that this is the closest star, in our own galaxy. Such impossibly huge numbers are used, in my opinion, so the mind will just accept them. Contemplating such numbers ends in futility and it is easier just to affirm what should result in natural skepticism.

So when the naturalists show us a pretty picture of supposed planets which may be like earth and which may have life (the mathematical numbers are incomprehensible here as well, along with the idea of an infinite past in which life and intelligence and complex biological an chemical information just happen to accidentally develop, for no reason, like that of earth), ask yourself how they could possibly know or test such a conclusion? They can't. We shouldn't even have to get to that point because, as noted, the laws of science not only state that matter can neither be created nor destroyed, but inorganic matter cannot create or become organic material (life).

This is what they show us ("relatively close, 40 light years away" -Fox4 News)

235,145,010,000,000 miles away. No, we cannot comprehend this distance. "Relatively close" is a ridiculous statement meant to cause uncritical acceptance.

Btw, all of the following are artists' renderings (Earth and Kepler-186F) which most people assume are photographs:

NASA essentially gives us "artist's concept" for everything

This is what they are using (color enhanced by NASA):

Darwin described what he called the "simple cell." But a single cell is "irreducibly complex." That is, any reduction in the complex structure of a single cell would render it useless and dead. This begs the question, where did this complex design and the organic information needed for it to exist come from? Further, why and how did a supposed cell create itself out of inorganic material (which we've established is an impossibility)?

And we haven't even touched the hem of the garment on not only complexity of proteins and their accidental creation, but the necessity of only certain proteins, arranged irreducibly in a specific order in order for life to even be possible (and only possible as the protein arrangements alone do not equal life).

 

Darwin and his contemporaries considered cells to be simple, jelly-like structures, but modern science reveals them as highly complex, irreducibly intricate systems... The discovery of such complexity challenges the notion that cells could evolve gradually through small, random changes. Studies suggest that evolving even a single protein from another could take far longer than the age of the universe under natural mutation rates.

The problem in evolution only gets worse from there. Let's just take the human nervous and cardiac systems. These are impossibly complex systems that no computer could even attempt to create with all the data provided, let alone it creating either by accident for no reason. And these extremely complex systems also work in tandem with each other (along with all the other complex systems in the human body). And there are similar, yet uniquely complex and widely varied systems in nearly 7000 mammal species. 

Evolution is sold to us as a force that cares about things like "survival" and "healing" and "procreation" and "advancement." It somehow created complex information from nowhere to insure survival. But the idea of survival in meaningless. What is its point? Everything dies. Nothing matters. 

Death is necessary in the evolutionary system for advancement and survival. If this accepted, we would be saying that evolution makes more complex life, just so it can die and give way to even more complex life. Somehow evolution has a plan! It thinks ahead!  And it kills its creation in order for the next advancement to arrive only so it can kill that off in a never-ending, goalless system of death leading to nothing. 

"Life" (including all life forms) is an accident with no purpose. We have given it value. We have declared it "important." Yet even these thoughts must be explained by random chemical responses to stimuli. This is thinking logically. It is drawing conclusions from even the unproven premises they have foist upon us. In the aforementioned Cosmos series, Sagan demands that his listeners think no farther back than the imagined Big Bang for this very reason. he is training people not to think beyond the premises they are told are proven. But thought itself, like everything else in that system., must also be accidental and explained in purely physical terms.

Every thought of every creature in a system that must be explained solely by the laws of science as men have declared them in terms of those laws. That is, things like feelings or opinions or values are all just chemical responses to stimuli. Uncontrollable. Random and meaningless and none greater than another. 

A murder is no greater than an act of selflessness. Love no greater than lust. Charity no greater than greed. These are all just accidental chemical reactions foreordained by DNA and random stimuli. And even if we don't want to accept such an idea, there remains nothing to distinguish concepts like right and wrong or moral and immoral (no matter how the godless philosopher wants to cloud the clear issue).

A blind, inorganic, non-living, thoughtless force is given the attributes of a caring god, and the irony is lost on the God-rejector. The atheist declares himself smarter than the God of scripture yet far less intelligent than a blind, meaningless, insentient force. He cannot create the simplest thing with all his intelligence that a blind force created by accident for no reason (defying the laws of science to do so). 

They have a god. It is all-powerful, it is all-knowing, it is smarter than the atheist can even comprehend. But it asks nothing of him and he is free to create his own system of morality. This is the god they choose, the god they worship, the god they believe has their best interests at heart. It is also a god they can ignore when their flesh desires whatever it will. In fact, some of the worst acts of the flesh can be excused or even championed as they serve their master's goal of "survival" and evolution.

Sadly, but not surprisingly, many professed Christians and many denominations (including the enormous Roman Catholic Church) have compromised with evolution. In an evolutionary system, death is good and necessary (contradicting its supposed goal of survival) and God is its author. Death is the enemy. It is not the mechanism of advancement, but a power that had to be defeated. 

The acceptance of evolution and an eternal, mindless universe has sewn the seeds of destruction of not only the western world, but of the truths of scripture, the only place men can find the remedy and rescue from the power of death. 

The forces that have poisoned sound doctrine have done so, no gently, but with force. A corrupt laity has imposed its errors on the willfully blind sheep and they accept no compromise. They have joined the God-deniers in there dismissal and mockery of God, the scriptures, and faithful believers. Bible teacher, J. Vernon McGee explained, and rightly warned, his decision to leave the Presbyterian Church because of its compromises with the world:

"[the] liberal leadership [had] taken over the machinery of the presbytery with a boldness and ruthlessness that is appalling." 

Ruthlessness indeed. And the clergy class in the Presbyterian Church as other clergy in other systems claiming the name of Christ has taken along with it countless millions and has led them into darkness and doubt and destruction. 

[McGee] often spoke of the days of societal apostasy in Christianity and secularism that he believed he was witnessing during his lifetime, warning that spiritual apostasy was always the first of the three stages leading to the fall of nations, commonly observed throughout the Bible, the second and third being, respectively, immorality and political anarchy.

-Compare: The Amazing, Alarming, and Awful Apostasy

 

We are in the last stage. The outward church is in apostacy. Immorality is the norm and widely accepted and approved as not only normal, but even as good. Western political parties are embracing the chaos of communism and atheism. The true God is shunned and any politician openly quoting scripture is demonized as the sellers of Sharia Law and ritual-based Christendom are championed. A very dark age is ahead. An age so dark, it cannot be imagined. 

And its cause is greatly because of the surrender of the individual believer to a wicked and corrupt clergy class. This has always been a curse on Christendom. But the curse is now ubiquitous and the clergy class horrifyingly compromised and corrupt. Men love to surrender their duty too a clergy class. A class that has rejected Paul and his revelation for the current age. They'd rather follow their pastor or their denomination. So it was, so it ever shall be.

Study to show yourself approved by God, a workman who need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

-2 Timothy 2:15 

Follow me [Paul] as I follow Christ.

-1 Corinthians 11:1 

 

I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, exhort you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you were called.

-Ephesians 4:1

Basic Introduction to the Idea of Understanding the Acts Age in Bullet Form

 We return to another bullet list. I believe this quick overview might help those interested in making sense of either seeming contradictions in scripture or who may wonder why they don't see things evident in the lives of some believers in scripture evident in their own lives.

Many local churches (and most denominations) claim they are either an "Acts church" or they believe they are part of the Acts body of believers (they believe was created at Pentecost) and share its hope. Even so-called cessationist groups claim large parts of the Acts age and its epistles for themselves. We will not examine the Acts epistles here (we've done that elsewhere), but this distinction between the Acts and Post-Acts epistles is paramount in understanding seeming difficulties and the calling of the current age. I've included a quick chart and a link to related posts.

Recall there are 21 epistles which fall into three groups of seven:

Acts Age (7)	Post-Acts (7)	Apostles to the Jews/Dispersion (7)
Romans	Ephesians	1 Peter
Galatians	Colossians	2 Peter
1 Corinthians	Philippians	1 John
2 Corinthians	1 Timothy	2 John
1 Thessalonians	2 Timothy	3 John
2 Thessalonians	Titus	Jude
Hebrews	Philemon	James

 

Related studies:

Video with Slides: The Epistles

Who is a Jew?

Acts Age Epistles - Part 1

Acts Age Epistles - Part 2

Acts Age Epistles - Part 3

Acts Age Epistles - Part 4

Acts Age Epistles - Part 5

The Present Age - What is Our Hope and How Do We Live - Part 1 

The Present Age - What is Our Hope and How Do We Live - Part 2

We note that the Book of Acts is continuation of the work the Lord Jesus began in his ministry to Israel.

Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age...

-Luke 3:23

 

He said to them, “I must preach the kingdom of God to other cities also, for this is why I was sent.” And He was preaching in the synagogues of Galilee.

-Luke 4:43-44

 

These twelve Jesus sent out, and commanded them, saying, “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. As you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’

-Matthew 10:5-7

 

Then Jesus went from there and departed into the regions of Tyre and Sidon. There, a woman of Canaan came out of the same regions and cried out to Him, saying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David. My daughter is severely possessed by a demon.” But He did not answer her a word. And His disciples came and begged Him, saying, “Send her away, for she cries out after us.” But He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

-Matthew 15:21-24 

The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, concerning all that Jesus began both to do and teach, until the day when He was taken up, after He had given commandments through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom He had chosen, to whom He presented Himself alive after His passion by many infallible proofs, appearing to them for forty days, and speaking concerning the kingdom of God. Being assembled with them, He commanded them, “Do not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, of which you have heard from Me. For John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” So when they had come together, they asked Him, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”

-Acts 1:1-6

The Lord Jesus began his public ministry declaring the Kingdom of God at age 30. He preached that Kingdom to Israel alone and forbade his disciples to preach it to anyone except to Jews. He was crucified and was resurrected out from among the dead at about age 33. Acts 1 immediately follows and records the first 40 days of the Lord's risen ministry was to those disciples about that Kingdom. 

Note that in Acts 1 that what the Lord taught (this is the Risen Lord immediately after his triumph over the grave) is not recorded for us. It was specific teaching about the Kingdom to those men. Why? Because had the condition of Israel's repentance been met, the events recorded in the prophets regarding Israel and the covenants and the cleansing and the parousia (Greek, meaning the return of the King among his people) would have come to pass. 

“Now brothers [Men of Israel, v.12], I know that you acted in ignorance, as did also your rulers. But what God foretold through all the prophets, that His Christ should suffer, He thus fulfilled. Therefore repent and be converted, that your sins may be wiped away, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send the One who previously was preached to you, Jesus Christ, whom the heavens must receive until the time of restoring what God spoke through all His holy prophets since the world began. 

For Moses indeed said to the fathers [cf Rom 9], ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers. You shall hear whatever He may say to you. And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that prophet shall be utterly eliminated from the people’ [Deut 18]. “Indeed, all the prophets since Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold these days. You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.’ God, having raised up His Son Jesus, sent Him to you first, to bless you in turning every one of you from your iniquities.”

-Acts 3:17-24

Let us turn to the Book of Acts itself and the conditions and teachings and patterns found there.

As we think about the constant drone of being an "Acts church," let's look briefly at how starkly different the Acts age was, not only in practice and instructions, but in its hope. As we read our list below, ask yourself if your pastor is prepared to preach directly from these texts and promises and warnings without spiritualizing or trying to explain away the passage or the book as "transitional" (thus rendering it useless to us on the other side of the supposed transition). These same pastors unironically pull some things from the Acts age as absolutes while dismissing other things as compromises for the assumed transition.  

We pause here to note a transition of sorts that we should recognize. There is no more revelation from God. Paul received the final revelation from God and the canon was closed with Second Timothy. That does not mean that all of scripture has been fulfilled. Of course not! There are many prophecies from both the Hebrew and Greek scriptures that still have a fulfillment ahead. 

The transition we do recognize is a transition from the leadership of the chosen apostle to the Gentiles, the one to whom the final revelation and the Mystery of the current age was revealed (Paul) into the post-apostolic age we are currently in.

This is not an exhaustive list, just some nuggets to think about as your pastor takes you to the Book of Acts and tells you that you are in the same calling and church. (Obviously some things Paul or the Apostles did that we cannot do have no spiritual application. Paul claiming his roman citizenship, for example. We obviously do not claim such a legal privilege, but we can easily ignore such things as they have no connection whatsoever to the faith and acts of obedience in the Book.)

• The Lord did not reveal the details of the Kingdom "in Israel" to us (Acts 1)
• No one sees flames above his head when receiving the Spirit (Acts 2)
• We do not have all things in common (Acts 2)
• There were no Gentiles at Pentecost (Acts 2)
• Do we tell people to get baptized to receive the Holy Spirit? (Acts 2, compare Acts 10)
• We do not promise the return of Christ if Israel repents (Acts 3)
• We do not heal the lame (Acts 3)
• We do not sell all we have and live communally (Acts 4)
• No one drops dead from lying or holding back promised proceeds  (Acts 5)
• Angels don't open jail cells and give us instructions (Acts 5)
• We don't listen to any Sanhedrin at all about anything (Acts 5)
• We do not perform signs and wonders (Acts 5)
• We don't refer to "our father Abraham" when speaking to Jews (Acts 7)
• Jacob's sons [12 tribes] are not "our fathers" (Acts 7)
• The Egyptians did not deal deceitfully with our fathers (Acts 7)
• No one receives a new nature by the laying on of anyone's hands (Acts 8)
• The Spirit takes no one away (Acts 8)
• God is not speaking and assigning specific commissions (Acts 9)
• God does not have those commissioned specifically to Jew or to Gentile (Acts 9, Gal 2)
• We don't raise the paralyzed (Acts 9)
• Gentiles do not have to wait to be part of the current calling (Acts 10)
• The Holy Spirit does not fall before or after baptism (Acts 10, compare Acts 2)
• No one is commissioned to Jews only (Acts 11)
• Angels do not release us from prison (Acts 12)
• Paul knew Israel was still Israel (Acts 13)
• Paul identifies with Israel as having common fathers (Acts 13)
• Paul speaks of Christ as the Savior for Israel (Acts 13)
• John the Baptist's ministry of the Kingdom was to Israel alone (Acts 13)
• We don't heal the cripples (Acts 14)
• We don't preach many afflictions to enter the kingdom (Acts 14)
• We don't have different rules for Jews and Gentiles (Acts 15)
• We don't teach Jews to be cicrumcized (Acts 15)
• We don't place Gentiles living among believing Jews under the conditions of Leviticus (Acts 15)
• We don't cast out spirits of divination (Acts 16)
• We don't promise anyone if he believes he and his while house will be recused (Acts 16)
• It is not our practice to go to Jews [still separate from Gentiles] first (Acts 17)
• We don't go to Jerusalem to keep the Feasts of the Law (Acts 18)
• We do not lay hands to commit the Holy Spirit (Acts 19)
• We do not speak in tongues or prophesy (Acts 19)
• Declaring the whole counsel of God meant the Hebrew canon alone (Acts 20)
• The Holy Spirit is not giving new revelation to us (Acts 21)
• We do not take vows or shave our heads (Acts 21)
• We do not assure Jews we are keeping the Law and teaching circumcision (Acts 21)
• We do not refer to "the God of our fathers" (Acts 22)
• We do not refer to the Law in our defense (Acts 23)
• The Lord does not stand before any of us with specific instructions (Acts 23)
• We do not bring alms and offerings to the nation Israel (Acts 24)
• We do not purify ourselves according to the Law to observe the feasts (Acts 24)
• We are not judged for nor do we preach the hope in the promises God made to Israel's fathers (Acts 26)
• We do not preach only what Moses and the Prophets said would come (Acts 26)
• We do not observe nor make plans based on the Day or Atonement (Acts 27)
• We cannot claim miraculous rescue from the Lord for ourselves and others (Acts 27)
• We do not get bitten by poisonous snakes to no effect (Acts 28)
• We don't tell Jews we are still observing all Mosaic customs (Acts 28)
• We do not suffer for the hope of Israel (Acts 28)

These are just some things pulled from the Book of Acts itself, We have not included the Acts age epistles. We have looked at those and linked some of those studies above. This was a time when the kingdom was "at hand" and both the time to "restore the Kingdom in Israel" (Acts 1) and the "restoration of all things" (Acts 3) and the return of the Lord in the clouds to take his place on David's throne were the expectations.  

I realize that many of points noted are explained by believers either simply cultural accommodation or singular to Apostolic callings. On the latter, I hope we can then agree that there are no apostles today as we see none of these things in any single believer. Certainly no one is writing any inspired texts. We note again, the canon was closed with Paul. 

I now rejoice in sufferings for your sakes, and I contribute my share to what is lacking among the tribulations of Christ, in my flesh, for the sake of his body, which is the church, of which I have become a minister, according to the dispensation of God which was given to me for you, to fill the word of God – the mystery which was hidden away from the ages and from the generations, but now has been made manifest to his saints, to whom God wished to make known what the richness is of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory, whom we proclaim, admonishing every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom, in order that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus, for which I also labor, striving according to his invigoration which invigorates me with power.

-Colossians 1:24-29 (Far Above All)

But if we fully embrace both the common explanations, we have rendered the book (and the epistles) as almost meaningless. You may have noted that the Book of Colossians is from Paul's Post-Acts ministry and is one of the seven books written for the current age.

The excuse of  all things being either transitional or of local custom or pertaining only the apostles is essentially the entirety of the Book of Acts as we seek to find ourselves in it today. And while we may conveniently (as I would frame it) chalk up all of the references to Israel, the fathers, and observances of the Law and Feasts to simply "accommodation," such accommodation today would be considered today by believers as heresy and even a denial of the faith.

"For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God [the priesthood], and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen."

-Romans 9 (during the Acts Age)

Paul, near the end of the Acts in Acts 28, is still calling Jews his "brothers" and is still preaching "the hope of Israel" to Jews first. While in chains for the hope of Israel in Acts 28, when he reveals the glorious hope and unsearchable riches of the current age, he declares he is in chains for hope of us Gentiles (which would be all men when the middle wall of partition fell). 

After three days Paul called the leaders of the Jews together. When they had assembled, he said to them, “Brothers, having done nothing contrary to our people or the customs of our fathers, I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans. When they had examined me, they were determined to release me, because there was no charge against me deserving death. But when the Jews objected, I was compelled to appeal to Caesar, not that I had any charge to bring against my nation. For this reason I have asked to see you and speak with you, because I am bound with this chain for the hope of Israel.”

-Acts 28:17-19

Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called the “uncircumcision” by the so-called “circumcision” in the flesh by human hands, were at that time apart from Christ, alienated from the citizenship of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who were formerly far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For He is our peace, who has made both groups one and has broken down the barrier of the dividing wall, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of the commandments contained in ordinances, that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus making peace, and that He might reconcile both to God into one body through the cross, thereby slaying the enmity. And He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.

-Ephesians 2:11-18

Separating Jews and Gentiles; teaching Jews to circumcize and observe the Law; putting Gentile believers under Levitical restraints; going to Jews first in any city or town with a synagogue; speaking of the hope of Israel; promising the return of the Lord, etc. These would all mark one as a loony at best and as a dangerous cultist at worst today, but all were the practices and the patterns and the teachings of the Book of Acts. 

So where does this leave us? It is my opinion that while most of professing Christendom tries to find itself in the Book of Acts, most of what it finds there (a) it does not practice (b) it does not experience (c) it condemns as error either then or today. They have rendered the book useless as they claim it is their Magna Carta.  

As for us, we endeavor to walk, not in another's calling and hope, but in our own. For this is how we will be judged.

I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, exhort you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you were called.

-Ephesians 4:1