SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Eight Scriptural Reasons For House Churches

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re: What is the Main Reason We Gather Together?

Different traditions have different answers to the question of why we gather together.

Catholics: To Receive the Sacraments
Many Protestants: To Hear the Scripture Expounded
Many Protestants: To Worship God

Despite the risk of over-simplification, I believe each of these privileges one quality over all the others.

One of these privileges the hierarchy because only duly authorized agents of the hierarchy are allowed to administer the sacraments.

One of these privileges human intellect, because only the most intelligent are able to speak on a single topic for 30 to 45 minutes.

One of these either privileges human emotion or privileges the ability to endure boredom! (Nowhere in the New Testament is Worship described as the primary reason for gathering together. Nowhere.)

* * * * * * * *

Answer: The main reason we gather together is to encourage one another.

"And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another." (Hebrews 10:24-25)

Why are we not supposed to give up meeting together? So that we can "encourage one another." Encouragement and exhortation are why we meet, to encourage and exhort ONE ANOTHER. We don't meet to be encourage and exhorted by one woman or man at the lecturn.

Note: "Let us consider how." We need to think about HOW we can spur one another to love and good deeds. Love and good deeds take many forms, depending on the giftedness of the individual.

Spurring one another to love and good works, encouragement and exhortation, do not occur automatically. We can't assume that simply because we meet in a living room that we automatically will encourage one another.

Ya' gotta think how!

Like others have already remarked, this is one of the "one another" passages.

If we privilege Bible exposition, communion, or worship (so-called) above other ways we encourage one another and spur one another to love and good deeds, then we are missing out on what God intended to result from us gathering together.

* * * * * * * *

When people quote Hebrews 10:24 to support mere church attendance, where there is NO encouragement taking place, where we are NOT spurring ONE ANOTHER to love and good works, then Hebrews 10:24 is being PROSTITUTED to empty institutional goals--often just to keep attendance up, offerings up, and keeping the doors open.

* * * * * * * *

Since Jesus called us friends, then we should certainly be friends to one another. We must not downplay the value of friendship.

Personally, I have a hard time making friends. But I have learned not to pooh-pooh other people's giftedness in having friends. They are ministering in ways I can't.

I try not to denigrate other people's areas of giftedness. For me, that's a kind of "sour grapes," a way of privileging my area of giftedness above the giftedness of others.

* * * * * * * *

I try to be a source of encouragement to my pastor. Besides being his friend over coffee, I let him know how his sermons have helped me solve dilemmas. I give him input on possible sermon ideas. And I occasionally rail against his traditions.

I am quite frank with him regarding the hierarchy, his sacramentalism, my disdain for "the building," the requirements for ordination--everything.

And he listens to me. I have heard "some" of my convictions echoed in his sermons. I'm helping my traditional congregation in this mainline denomination through my friendship with one man.

 2010/7/28 2:01
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

I wonder what the optimum size of a group would be to enable the admonitions of 1 Cor 12-14 to be thoroughly implemented. I have one passage particularly in mind...

29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge. 30 But if anything is revealed to another who sits by, let the first keep silent. 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be encouraged. 32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 1Cor 14 NKJV

This envisages a gathering in which those gathered can have eye contact with each other. It presupposes that even as the prophet speaks he is submitted to the other prophets and ready to stop on a dime to make way for his brother.

What size of meeting would this be? ;-)


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2010/7/28 12:04Profile
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

From what I remember in my studies, the average home in those days could've contained about 30 people in the living room. Wealthier Christians, who had larger homes with larger meeting spaces, are estimated to have had homes large enough to seat about 100. Which interestingly enough, is about the average size of the average church in America anyway.

Building a sanctuary to meet in would have been very impractical in those days. Granted, in my opinion it's not very practical today. Just imagine the chore it would've been back then?


_________________
Jimmy H

 2010/7/28 12:22Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

around a 100 is an interesting number. If the local church is to function as an institution there is hardly any upper limit to their numbers providing you have an efficient administration system, but if the local church was designed to function as a family... 100 would certainly be close to an upper limit.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2010/7/28 13:43Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Thought some of you might be interested in this decoration from British House church c400.

http://bit.ly/cxTAqz

It is at Lullingstone Roman Villa in Kent, UK


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2010/7/28 14:04Profile
osandoval
Member



Joined: 2010/2/19
Posts: 89


 Re:

(quote)Building a sanctuary to meet in would have been very impractical in those days. Granted, in my opinion it's not very practical today. Just imagine the chore it would've been back then?(quote)

The Jews had their synagogues and the pagans had their temples. Being that there were wealthy Christians back then, and that there was generous giving among Christians, I don't think it would have been hard for Christians to build their own church buildings. Yet the oldest church building dates to around the third or fourth century, around the time of Constantine.

I actually think it would have been easier back then because there were less expenses than today, such as electricity bills, etc.

I have no problem with Christians erecting buildings today for certain purposes, given that there are wealthy Christians who can afford to pay for them; and given that the buildings are not used as the regular meeting places of Christians. I see nothing wrong with using these buildings like Paul did, for evangelism and teaching. Yet we may not even need to buy these things for those purposes, since we have many public places where this can be accomplished freely or at a minimal cost, such as public parks, etc.

The sad thing is to see the "tithes" and offerings of poor Christians being used to keep these things up and running, as if they were such a necessity to the life of the church. We think that unless we have a church building we cannot really have a church.

Many of these buildings are seen as temples, sanctuaries, or houses of God, something holy or sacred in an unbiblical sense. Such a view comes from the old testament, Catholicism, as well as from paganism, not from the new testament. We are the temple and house of God, not some man-made building. We can use them for the glory of God but we must be careful not to idolize them or see them as that important or essential.




 2010/7/28 14:26Profile
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

Well, my thought about erecting buildings back then being somewhat impractical would have to do with the sheer speed at which the early Church grew. Also, while there were no doubt wealthy Christians in the early Church, Paul's letters seem to indicate that the wealthy were few.


_________________
Jimmy H

 2010/7/28 15:23Profile









 Philologos and Osandoval

Philologos, the I Corinthians chapters you brought up are the most comprehensive description of the kinds of things that can or should happen when Christians gather together.

It would be difficult, however, to print up the order of worship for such a meeting. And to some it would appear "disorderly."

Unfortunately, sanctuary design works AGAINST the body functioning as it should. We have allowed the institutional benefits of "warehousing" Christians to trump our ability to have Biblical koinonia.

* * * * * * * *

"We are the temple and house of God, not some man-made building. We can use them for the glory of God but we must be careful not to idolize them or see them as that important or essential." (Osandoval)

We know from Bible history that God tolerates things that he never intended. The office of the king, for example, was not God's idea. It was man's.

The Bronze Serpent was God's idea, but it became an idol, and had to be destroyed.

Church buildings are supposedly an "aid" to the Body of Christ. Unfortunately, it interferes with so many priorities of the community of believers that I don't see it as an "aid" to believers. The buildings are only an aid to a self-perpetuating institution, allowing an army of "hirelings" to make a comfortable living.

I know that's harsh. Unfortunately, too many young men and women are seduced into thinking that ministry = ordination. Young men and women prepare for "the ministry" before they know enough to see the trap laid before them.

This is closely related to the emphasis on and preoccupation with "authority" in the church in another thread.

 2010/7/28 19:38
osandoval
Member



Joined: 2010/2/19
Posts: 89


 Re: RonaldGoetz

"Church buildings are supposedly an "aid" to the Body of Christ. Unfortunately, it interferes with so many priorities of the community of believers that I don't see it as an "aid" to believers. The buildings are only an aid to a self-perpetuating institution, allowing an army of "hirelings" to make a comfortable living."(RonaldGoetz)

The only way I would think it is ok to keep the buildings would be if most of them were completely remodeled and used entirely differently for different purposes. The stained glass windows, the steeples with crosses, etc. would have to go, so that they would look like regular buildings instead of "religious" ones. The notion of a building as a "sanctuary" is completely foreign to the New Testament.

I agree with you regarding the hierarchical system, but like you said, I think its a whole other thread.

 2010/7/28 20:45Profile









 The notion of a building as "sanctuary" is unbiblical.

"The notion of a building as 'sanctuary' is unbiblical." (Osandoval)

There are a host of Biblical words & concepts that have been hijacked/usurped/prostituted by Christendom.

Church = Building, Denomination, Organization
Worship = Singing (cf. Rom. 12:1)
Fellowship (koinonia) = Coffee & Donuts, and Chatting
Sanctuary = Building
New Testament = Books (cf Jer. 31:31ff)
The Ministry = Ordained Employment
Sound Teaching = Systematic Theology

With this whole-scale hijacking of so many key words, is it any wonder the "church" is in such bad shape?

* * * * * * * *

But it is too easy for me to carp and criticize.

All religions, Christian and non-Christian alike, eventually "settle down" into routines, with routine avenues to leadership, typical "sacred" buildings, competing doctrinal systems, etc.

Jesus' disciples wanted to shut down some people's preaching who were not "one of them." Jesus said, "Anyone who is not against me is with me."

Ultimately, in reality, each of us ends up living and ministering in a situation more or less suited to who we are as individuals.

And it seems that most people here agree that there is no one perfect way of "doing church," especially regarding house churches vs. traditional buildings.

Or am I making excuses for myself for not being in a house church? Oh well...

 2010/7/28 22:02





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy