how to handle doctrinal issues

First I would make sure the gathering is basically scriptural and holds to Bible-only, rather than religious reasoning with innovations. That will reduce various doctrinal ideas greatly, and then one can "search the Scriptures", as God tells us. Write me at PM if you wish to discuss this further.

As we handle any differences -with great grace, humility, care and respect. We see Paul quite clearly allowing Christians to differ on some issues. However, there are some core doctrines that we must ensure are clearly understood and accepted within a group.

John
NZ

Quite true, Johnnz. I would add that not only "within a group", as you say, but in the universal Church worldwide ---for I don't believe God's testimony was ever intended to be sectarian with every gathering having innovations. My understanding is not popular, I realize.

It's probably something you'll need to state, or at least have an answer ready for. As a group settles in together they start bringing their reasoning closer, but that can also cause problems (smugness, exclusion of newcomers, condemnation).

You might make a short statement every week that doctrine doesn't save us, which most everyone will agree to. Having that echo in their heads might make them less likely to worry someone has it wrong.

Also, when people contribute, make sure you support diverse thought as long as they have scriptural/experiential backing for it. That way, it will set a tone that disagreement is welcomed.

Sure, you are going to have things that you don't all agree on.

The key is 'love one another', so that folks can share their perspective without being told off or silenced. And allow things to be 'mulled over', because that is how we learn together.

The main focus is always JESUS and HIS GRACE (unconditional love towards me)
Not on doctrine, or problems….always let GRACE be your filter.

-eric

Thought I would share my thought on how the Bible says we should handle it: How To Know What Is Truth - False Doctrine

Is the home group part of a group of home fellowships that are affiliated with a local church, or are you an independent group?

If you are part of a network, then who is the "senior pastor?" Let your group know that, as senior pastor, that man is responsible to God for the quality & content of what is taught in the church God has called him to lead. Further the group leaders, as elders of the church, are called by God to humble obedience to the pastor God has appointed.

Therefore, the people spreading confusion & contradiction need to stop it, and submit themselves to pastoral authority.

If you are an independent home study, then who is the leader? The leader will need to tell the divisive member the exact same thing.

All of us can attest to reading a verse one day and getting one thing from it; then reading it another day and getting something very different. This will happen in the group.

It might happen every week; it is important to embrace how everyone comes in on a different train of thought, and needs different things out of each meeting.

One person might be laid off and finding encouragement in verses of God's support, while another person is feeling convicted of living too lavishly and competing with others. They will take different stances on a topic, simply for what God is teaching them at the time. Not doctrinal differences, but it could appear that way.

There will also be people who left another fellowship/denom and are unusually sensitive about returning to those teachings; or people eager to try a new inspiration; or people who tried something and found weakness in it. We should be learning from each other, not trying to find which one is the rightest.

If the group is run under a denomination, as said above, then they have agreed to run it under those precepts, case closed. But where two or more gather in God's name, He is there; you don't need to add leadership unless you sense a need for it.

I visited a home church of some old friends for several weeks, and found them so caught up in their own doctrine that it was difficult to say anything without being corrected. We'd all served in churches for decades, and most of us had taken theology courses, read many books, and taken on leadership.

There was an ordained minister leading the group, so the problem wasn't lack of leaders or experience or knowledge or unity. Rather, too much unity and expertise ... many combined decades of Christianity represented. The group had honed their own belief system through years of meetings together, and refused to hear other logic.

While it might seem their refinement of doctrine would be right, this tight-knit process is how cults often grow. People feed each others' sense of rightness, narrowing and tight discipline. They exclude new thought, and the narrowing adds risk.

There needs to be a premise that people will respect each other, listen to logical reasoning that might seem unfamiliar, and stay humble. You are probably not gathering to formalize your doctrine, so make sure the focus remains on drawing near to God and honoring Him; discipling each other; studying His Word; praying for each other; and bringing new people to a relationship with God.

I had a good lesson early in my Christian experience.

I was in the Navy, and was on a large ship with more than a thousand people aboard. There were ten of so of us who were Christians, and we all came from very different church backgrounds. We were heading out for a six month deployment, and we committed to fellowship together and edify each other.

We struggled with fellowshiping together, because each of us wanted to emphasize our own particular slant on things.

What eventually happened was we had one brother who had a lot of funny ideas. He started pushing his views on the group, and we all had to step back and ask ourselves:

"What are the core points of the Gospel, and at what point does it become "another gospel?""
and
"What are the minor issues where good men can differ and yet still be Christians?"

We eventually had to ask the one brother to take his funny ideas somewhere else, and the rest of us simply celebrated our salvation together.

Good example, glad it worked out well. It is amazing how different each person is on this earth. Snowflakes.

ByTheSpirit said:

What is an effective way of handling doctrinal differences within a house church? Im sure there will be some, we all are fallible and bound to understand differently.

Click to expand...

Before the meeting takes place, set a doctrinal agenda so that everyone can be informed as to what is to be discussed. This way all attendees can do their own research, write down quotes from the Bible and other informed resources, and then everyone can render an opinion on a subject.

Whenever I have a doctrinal discussion on this forum I always make a point of looking up blueletterbible.org or other online source which gives definitive proofs of the opinion rendered by the author. It usually settles any disputes quite readily.

ByTheSpirit said:

What is an effective way of handling doctrinal differences within a house church? Im sure there will be some, we all are fallible and bound to understand differently.

Click to expand...

I don't think there is a singular answer to this (regardless of the 'type' of church) - many principles and much patience and maturity will be required to keep the balance and peace.

There is an oft quoted maxim (one of the thread's posters is in fact using this in his signature) - it goes like this:

"in essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity." (or similar)

It's a thoughtful and wise saying in many respects IMO but it does actually still leave us with one massive problem... Who decides what is "essential" or "non-essential" ?

I certainly don't have all the answers but I would just like to draw attention to what might be the more relevant factors - that is, what affects our PRACTICES and what is more to do with THEORETICAL BELIEFS (for want of a better description) ?

For Example:

One member might believe strongly in Calvinism (I won't bother to summarize, most will understand these issues) and another member may be firmly Arminian. In most cases (but there are extremes) there is no reason why the two brothers can't accept the others 'intellectual' position and still worship God side-by-side.

Another Example:

One member might believe strongly that the rebirth of Israel in 1948 was a fulfillment of prophecy and that Christians should take an interest in, and pray for that nation. Another, equally well-studied brother may believe sincerely that those prophecies relate to a former restoration of that nation and that there is no special significance in the presence of that nation today. But if both men agree that God loves ALL people, and that He wants to save ALL men then the second can still easily say "Amen" when the first prays for the salvation of the Jews. And the first, if he is gracious, can accept that the second brother is sincere in his understanding and not an anti-Semite just because he doesn't place special significance on that particular group.

An Example Causing Difficulty:

The above issues, if held graciously in check should not bar two men who love God and His Word from fellowshipping together, but... Let's take a more PRACTICAL difference... What if one man believes that the 'house church' should follow a set liturgy (you know, three hymns, a collection and a monologue sermon) and the other believes that when the church gathers everyone should participate and the flow should be mostly free and spontaneous. Now we have a genuine problem. And to my mind, where the first two examples (of very different views) can with patience exist alongside one another this latter issue is actually the more serious one in reality - because it affects WHAT WE DO not just WHAT WE BELIEVE. If through prayer and examination of the Scriptures no accord can be reached then quite frankly it will be impossible to function as part of a 'living church' together.

In Summary...
Some people would place huge emphasis on the first two issues but they really shouldn't stop us from enjoying everyday fellowship with one another. The third issue may not sound like a biggie to many people but in REALITY it is where our differences must be resolved or we simply will not be able to 'do church' together on a regular basis.

My Final Thought...
Issues that affect PRACTICE need to be derived from the NT instead of 'tradition'

phydaux said:

Is the home group part of a group of home fellowships that are affiliated with a local church, or are you an independent group?

If you are part of a network, then who is the "senior pastor?" Let your group know that, as senior pastor, that man is responsible to God for the quality & content of what is taught in the church God has called him to lead. Further the group leaders, as elders of the church, are called by God to humble obedience to the pastor God has appointed.

Therefore, the people spreading confusion & contradiction need to stop it, and submit themselves to pastoral authority.

If you are an independent home study, then who is the leader? The leader will need to tell the divisive member the exact same thing.

Click to expand...

Leader? The "Leader" lives inside each member of the Body. There are no leaders, only servants.

Gal_5:13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

Elders of a church are mature Christians. People that have been perfected in love and know the Lord. We are to submit ourselves to the authority of the Holy Spirit. You don't need a man to cause you to love each other and keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. You need Jesus.

Post #6 - Right on!

1watchman said:

Quite true, Johnnz. I would add that not only "within a group", as you say, but in the universal Church worldwide ---for I don't believe God's testimony was ever intended to be sectarian with every gathering having innovations. My understanding is not popular, I realize.

Click to expand...

If I am understanding you correctly, the "innovations" should cause the group the group to divide. In 1 John 2:5, we see people who went out from the group because they were different. They would have stayed if they had been like-minded. Division in a group would seem like a naturally occurring process.

Below: some different versions of the same verse.

New International Version
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

New Living Translation
These people left our churches, but they never really belonged with us; otherwise they would have stayed with us. When they left, it proved that they did not belong with us.

English Standard Version
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.