It is always moving, and sometimes deeply frustrating, to hear or see someone talking about "getting back to the apostolic church."
But not so much because we've somehow lost our way for a couple thousand years. Rather, I am moved and sometimes frustrated by the fact that there are such apostolic churches right around most corners in the U.S.--and even, as I am increasingly learning, in many places around the world where the gospel is only recently penetrating.
Where are they? Reformed, Presbyterian churches. That was the entire point of the Reformation--back to the Bible. But here we are in a biblically illiterate age, in which it is assumed that all expressions of the church are equally man-made, and therefore this idea of "the apostolic" church is floated as something without creed, confession, or organization.
Really, I cannot think of a more efficient way of ensuring that you will have nothing but a man-made expression of the church than to leave it up to every man to make his own expression.
The most recent reminder of this for me was in response to a Presbyterian social media meme which humorously pointed out the great danger in being without formal church membership, being without creeds and confessions, and being without church discipline.

Predictably, one commentator complained, "I don't think the disciples had any of this."
If we knew our Bibles better, such rubbish would be rather easily dismissed as the ravings of unbelievers. But I actually hear this kind of reasoning from Reformed church officers.
Alas! Alas! God grant us a rediscovery of His Word as in the days of Josiah, where we realize that we need not make it up as we go along and, mourning over our past confusion and rebellion, eagerly put into place all that His Word calls for in His church.
So, is it true that the disciples had no formal church membership, no creeds or confessions, and no church discipline?
2Tim 1:13 refers to some kind of confession or catechism that Paul had given Timothy. Remarkable that, as far as we know, it doesn't appear in Scripture--just reinforces that uninspired arrangements of doctrine are a biblical response to Scriptural teaching.
Luke 1:4 ... Theophilus's instruction is literally referred to as catechizing
And of course they definitely had formal church membership and church discipline, otherwise what's with keeping a record of their number (Ac 2-4, etc), and how could someone be put out of the church if there was not a formal identification of who is in the church (1Cor 5-6, etc), and with all of the duties of believers to "one another" and of elders to their flock and the flock to their elders (Eph 4, 1Cor 12, Heb 13, 1Pet 5, all the pastoral epistles, etc), it would be impossible to know whether you are doing that without some formal recognition of who is a member and who is an elder. From whom could delegates to the Acts 15 assembly be selected? Etc. etc.
The canard of an unorganized apostolic hippie community is a figment of the imagination of an anti-authority age.
"Let's get back to the apostolic church" is just contemporary speak for "let me be rid of submission and commitment." But look at how Christ talks about being a disciple. It's all about submission and commitment. So, not at all surprising that there is plain evidence of all of these things in the New Testament.
Authority and orderliness have been instituted by Christ, through the Holy Spirit, since the very beginning.
Want to "get back to the apostolic church"? If you live in America, that's not difficult to do. Join a
NAPARC (or similar) church.