For Antioch to model fully what it means to be Christians, it must demonstrate orthopraxy by meeting physical needs (compare 2:42-47).

Antioch learns of a need through the word of prophets, Agabus in particular. Itinerant prophets ministered in the first-century church. They were evidence that the last days, the time of salvation, has dawned (2:17-18; Longenecker 1981:403). They "spoke revelation from the Spirit (1 Cor 14:29-30), usually in terms of edification and encouragement (1 Cor 14:3, 31) and even fundamental doctrine (Eph 3:4-5). But occasionally their ministry included prediction" (E. F. Harrison 1986:197). Prompted by the Spirit, Agabus "makes a prediction" (in extrabiblical usage this action points to enigmatic speech [Lake and Cadbury 1979:131], but not here, according to Haenchen [1971:374]): a great famine will spread over the entire Roman world. Luke tells us this prediction was fulfilled during Claudius's reign (see note). The entire Roman world, literally, is the inhabited world politically, not geographically. At this time it was often viewed as coterminous with the Roman Empire (Lake and Cadbury 1979:131; Marshall 1980:204). This prediction was probably made before Claudius's reign (A.D. 41-54; Bruce 1990:277).

Since we too live in the last days, should we in the church expect to find prophets foretelling the future? Christians are divided on this issue, based on beliefs regarding how the closing of the canon of Scripture relates to the presence of revelation today. That factor must certainly be taken into account. Any claims to divinely inspired prophecy must be tested and must meet the criteria in Scripture for true prophecy (Deut 18:20-22). Alleged divinely inspired prophecy must be completely fulfilled. Anything less is not biblical.

The church responds in holistic liberality. Each member as he or she is financially able—that is, from discretionary income (compare Lev 25:49; Acts 19:25)—decides what to give and contributes it to a fund for famine relief. Their liberality is holistic in two ways. First, it extends beyond spiritual concern—"we will pray that God provides for you in your affliction"—to practical physical aid. Hence the collection is labeled a "service" (diakonia; Acts 6:1; 12:25; Rom 15:31; 2 Cor 8:4). Second, this interchurch relief involves the receiving church serving the sending church—a mixed Jewish and Gentile congregation serving a Jewish assembly. Such unity is based on the conviction that the church is a body greater than any single congregation within any culture. This unity carries with it a responsibility for the well-being of all disciples, wherever they are (note the use of the terms disciples and brothers). Barnabas and Saul take this collection to the elders (see comment at Acts 15:2), who have emerged as the administrators of physical aid in the Jerusalem church after the evident dispersal of the "Seven" at Stephen's martyrdom.

In our time, in the Western world and increasingly elsewhere, decades of social legislation have made the state responsible for meeting the physical needs of our neighbors, including fellow Christians. Antioch's example, then, raises the hard question: How much personal responsibility do I feel for the physical needs of others, especially the church in the Two-Thirds World? Though we cannot meet every need that global news brings to our attention, we can still do something to live out the holistic liberality that is an essential mark of being Christians.