| Poster | Thread |
| | Re: the House Church Movement in America | | Quote:
What do you think of the house church "restoration" movement? What are your thoughts on leaving "institutional" church? It's been said that this return to the "organic", simple church life is just as radical as the reformation itself. What are your thoughts on these statements?
I have left the institutional church a few months ago, but as yet have not found an organic house church. Have read several of Frank Viola's books and am completely with what he says about the body not being able to funcion as it should in an institutional church meeting with pre planned songs and pre planned messages with one man heading the church. It's true we cannot fellowship looking at someone's back. Did this happen in the NT church?. How did it came about that one man took charge of each church, (not that there should not be pastors, but he sees a pastor as a function of the church rather than a position of Headship). Having said that he is not against leadership. Organic house church is about Jesus Christ being the Head, and the church (people) expressing Him. The gifts being able to manifest with the Holy Spirit leading, with everyone expected to participate, being in community, like a family. With all the good things and bad things that go on in families. Just as we see in the NT letters.
If you are bored with Sunday meetings, tired of false teachings, and want to be able to know Christ in a deeper way, Frank Viola's research, backed up by scripture taken in context, and not the 'cut and paste' variety, shows the way. There needs to be a vision of the church God intended and for that we need to look at the beginnings. I am in process of doing that. I will add that I did not do this lightly.
Linda
|
|  2008/6/3 16:28 | | boG
Member
Joined: 2008/5/21
Posts: 349
Las Vegas, NV
| | Re: | | Quote:
Is this, i ask, being accomplished in our large congregations today?
Quote:
If we have the energy and desire needed to start a home church, we certainly have enough motivation to develop deeper fellowships with people at larger congregations.
This is absolutely true.
Quote:
I do not think it is a good idea to Home Church!! I have been around them, and I don't think it is a wise course to take!!
Any church, large or small, has the potential to adapt and conform to unChristian doctrines. So it is understandable that in one context many are fleeing from the institutionalized churches with its rigid structure in comparison to the more freeform home churches.
And, in context, these small independant house churches that have formed without solid, well founded, teachings from accountable ministers. Or lacking in the full range of effective five-fold ministry.
In the larger context, it is more difficult to adapt and change.
In the smaller context, it is easier, sometimes dangerously easy to change.
In my opinion, these two contexts need to work concurrently.
And even, one step more, the individual context.
We each seek the Lord in secret -- where we may receive or be prepared to receive "a psalm, a teaching, a revelation, a tongue, an interpretation." When we receive much, we have much to give.
Then we can meet throughout the week from home to home (it doesn't have to be just one). And share what we have received from the Lord. As we have freely received, so let us likewise, freely give.
And, as we are able, we should also meet in the larger context. It would be wonderful if there could be a single church for each city where we might all come together as a single local body of believers. Unfortunately, this is most unpractical for most cities. However, it wouldn't be unpractical if those who were set apart for the purposes of ministry came together often to edify one another. There ought to be unity among the brethren just as well as unity among the ministers in the government of Christ.
The main point that I would put my finger on, if I may, that needs to be changed in any church context is the individual one.
As I have experienced in almost every context of church, this common "empty" Christian coming for their "weekly fill". This ought not to be, it is unChristian. We should be "weekly [b]full[/b]" and then come together to pour ourselves out, honoring one another above ourselves.
The error I have found is this idea that the ministers of the church are supposed to pour out all the blessings so they might trickle down to the lowly surf-Christians. We have been very capitalistic with our Christianity haven't we.
You know, I woke up one morning, and this came to my mind:
Say there are 60 christians in a single church. In SIX days time that is cumulatively 360 days in one week. That is ONE YEARS worth of time WITH THE LORD coming together for a single Sunday gathering. And how many are coming "empty". What ever happened to "redeeming the time, because the days are evil"?
No matter how we structure "the church", the plain and simple truth remains. As Leonard Ravenhill said, "we don't have revival because we are content to live without it."
If we were truly concerned about God's will He would share it with us.
_________________
Jordan
|
| | 2008/6/3 16:44 | Profile | Compton
Member
Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 2732
| | Re: | | Quote:
The main point that I would put my finger on, if I may, that needs to be changed in any church context is the individual one.
One question I have for the house church movement is what do you do if the same problems you encountered at the 'institutional' church are at the 'organic' church...only this time the problems are sitting on sofas and dining room chairs instead of pews and folding chairs. ;-)
MC
_________________
Mike Compton
|
| | 2008/6/3 17:42 | Profile | JRuth
Member
Joined: 2008/6/1
Posts: 79
Moscow, PA
| | Re: | | Well my reason is rather long, so I will give a small part of my reason. A lot off the people who start home churching do it because they say that the church age is over, which it isn't.
They also claim that the churches are so worldly, and they don't want their children to be around it. Which I have nothing against!!
One of the biggest problems is that they overreact to the church too much. God has given us the local church for accountability, we need to use it as such!!
If you have any other questions feel free to ask!!
JRuth
_________________
Jessara
|
| | 2008/6/3 18:12 | Profile | linda7
Member
Joined: 2006/4/23
Posts: 101
West Sussex, England
| | Re: | | Bog wrote: Quote:
The main point that I would put my finger on, if I may, that needs to be changed in any church context is the individual one.
As I have experienced in almost every context of church, this common "empty" Christian coming for their "weekly fill". This ought not to be, it is unChristian. We should be "weekly full" and then come together to pour ourselves out, honoring one another above ourselves.
The problem also is that in a pre-planned 'service', with one man leading and a 'music ministry' leading song for all, where is the opportunity for one to come with a hymn a psalm or a spiritual song? A word of knowledge, a prophecy, where everyone is able and expected to participate? How can Christ overflow and be expressed by the individual? The time is limited, there is one man running it and the congregation is not able to even look each other in the eye. The church in many places is just an audience.
Linda
_________________
Linda
|
| | 2008/6/3 18:28 | Profile |
| | Re: | | I have attended a housechurch most of my christian life and it has been a great experience for me but in case you didn't know already there are some things you should be aware of. There is a movement out there that disregards all authority whatsoever and refuses to even refer to the bible because they believe we are spirit led only. It's very extreme but these people are full of unforgiveness and hatred for the institutional churches. I haven't run into any of them personally but they have some housechurch forums they blog on and they attend alot of these conferences. Just like the Pharasees you'll know thier fruits right away!
|
| | 2008/6/3 18:28 | | JRuth
Member
Joined: 2008/6/1
Posts: 79
Moscow, PA
| | Re: | | I agree with you, Rebekah_LF
_________________
Jessara
|
| | 2008/6/3 18:40 | Profile | linda7
Member
Joined: 2006/4/23
Posts: 101
West Sussex, England
| | Re: | | JRuth wrote: Quote:
One of the biggest problems is that they overreact to the church too much. God has given us the local church for accountability, we need to use it as such!!
I believe we are the church and we are accountable to Christ. He is our Head. And the Church is there to express Christ.
Linda
_________________
Linda
|
| | 2008/6/3 18:43 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Quote:
I haven't run into any of them personally but they have some housechurch forums they blog on and they attend alot of these conferences. Just like the Pharasees you'll know thier fruits right away!
Housechurch conferences that is...Actually I would be surprised if they even attended a conference so maybe not. They are very radical and will not be taught by any man.
|
| | 2008/6/3 18:44 | | KingJimmy
Member
Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC
| | Re: | | The only network of house churches I have come across that don't seem to have the bitter edge you find in many associated with the likes of Frank Viola, Gene Edwards and company is the NTRF (www.ntrf.org)
I went to one of their conferences in Charleston, SC a year or so ago and was quite moved with the simple and sincere love these people had for God and eachother. They didn't just sit there and bash/demonize the "institutional church."
While some of Viola's writings are profitable, anybody with any discernment will quickly recognize there is a cancerous bitterness in his writings. Take them with a grain of salt. The same goes with Gene Edwards... though he is trickier to pickup on because of his brilliant literary abilities.
_________________
Jimmy H
|
| | 2008/6/3 18:48 | Profile |
|
